Emotional Clinton Says, This is Personal

[Hissyspit]

Source: Associated Press

Emotional Clinton Says, This Is Personal
2008-01-07 14:35:46
By PHILIP ELLIOTT Associated Press Writer

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton's eyes welled up and her voice broke repeatedly Monday as she talked with voters in a restaurant about her campaign for the presidency. The former first lady was making a last-minute pitch for support as she spoke on the eve of the state's primary, with polls showing her trailing Democratic rival Barack Obama.

Asked by a sympathetic voter how she keeps going in the grueling campaign, she replied, "It's not easy. It's not easy." "And I couldn't do it if I just didn't, you know, passionately believe it was the right thing to do," she said, her voice catching. "You know, I've had so many opportunities from this country, I just don't want to see us fall backwards," she said, her voice trailing off. The voters crowded into the restaurant applauded encouragingly.

"So," she continued, then paused, seemingly to control her voice as her listeners applauded again. "You know, this is very personal for me. It's not just political. It's not just public. I see what's happening, and we have to reverse it. And some people think elections are a game. They think it's like who's up or who's down. It's about our country. It's about our kids' futures. It's really about all of us together. You know some of us put ourselves out there and do this against some pretty difficult odds. And we do it, each one of us, because we care about our country. But some of us are right and some of us are wrong. Some of us are ready and some of us are not."

- snip -

After she spoke several of the people in the Cafe Espresso audience crowded around Clinton and offered sympathetic support.

Read more: http://myembarq.com/news/news_reader.php?storyid=15716362&feedid=224

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. I hate the way this is being spun

"Hillary gets weepy" , "Hillary tears up". She was "tearing up" because what's personal to her -- and to me, and to everyone reading this forum -- is what this country has become. She's not weeping over Obama's surge, she's weeping the same way the Indian wept in that old commercial. This is OUR country, this is HER country, and she feels personally that it needs to go in a different direction. I hate that the media is spinning her to be feeling sorry for herself.

[peacebird]

5. they looked like crocodile tears to me...

just another strategy calculated to make her seem more human and appealing no doubt.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. I must agree.

[liberalhistorian]

17. Not to mention pulling

the gender card, which I knew she was going to try sooner or later. Boo-freaking-hoo. The Queen is learning that she is NOT automatically entitled to the throne. And if she was so concerned about the way the country was going, and it's going backwards, then she shouldn't have voted for every single war funding bill Bush has put forward, and she shouldn't have voted for that damned bankruptcy "reform" bill and she shouldn't have voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment and she shouldn't have voted........etc., etc. Boo-freaking-hoo.

[earthlover]

46. I believe it was Muskie who cried and his campaign was basically over after that....

So, just wondering if this emotional outburst will help Hillary like it hurt a male candidate.

[Myrina]

47. Exactly, and thank you

:hi:

[MollieBradford]

101. well, she didn't vote for some of those

things so you might want to check her voting record which is very liberal. The K-L was defanged AND she and Webb created the legislation that made sure bush could NOT go to war with Iran without congressional support. So there!
Stop being so nasty. She didn't cry, she just got a little emotional. No need to go all pan"Hillary Hater" over it.

[liberalhistorian]

103. LOL! Telling the truth about Hillary is not

going all "Hillary Hater". I see you've conveniently ignored all of her votes FOR war funding, EVERY single time one has come up. And I didn't realize anyone over the age of ten said "so there!" anymore, lol.

[HooptieWagon]

24. Agree with the crocodile tears

Uh, she's voted to maintain the direction of the country - so pot, kettle, black. Her hypocrisy is astounding...

[sendero]

33. HRC..

.... is way too culpable in the destruction of our country and our constitution to claim any high ground here.

Who is she fooling?

[Frank Cannon]

93. She SHOULD be crying

She has always been (and continues to be) a willing co-conspirator in the unfathomable clusterfuck that is our war in Iraq.

[hamsterjill]

8. We should all be crying

I agree with the poster who explained that they'd not denigrated any particular Democratic candicate because they will eventually support whoever is the nominee. So will I!

Hillary is crying from pain and anguish over what she has seen being done to erode the hard work that she and Bill put in while he was President. She has had to witness all of that progress made during Bill's administration disappear under the Bush Administration. And she's hurt and angry. We all should be - most of us are.

That said, however, the fact that she's female, and shed a tear publicly will not bode well with many voters who are looking for strength in their choices. For me, it merely makes her "human".

[aggiesal]

29. No it's because she seeing her candidacy go down the tubes ...

trailing by more than 10%. After coming in 3rd.

[hamsterjill]

37. No, I don't agree.

She's too polished to have let this type of emotion show unless she simply got choked up over the question.

As a seasoned politician, she is, I'm sure, well aware of the fact that the media and the other candidates will use this to portray her as weak and weak is not something she wants to be portrayed as - particularly when she is behind in the polls.

[aggiesal]

39. You keep telling yourself that ...

She didn't show any of this emotion last week when every
MSM and their Corporate backers had her winning the whole
thing, until surprise, surprise, the voters actually had
as say.

[Stephanie]

15. You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

It just amazes me the things attributed to HRC regardless of what she says or does. She is like the ultimate Rorsach test - people see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear from her, all evidence to the contrary be damned. Not saying you are wrong, just saying it's amazing that you are so convinced of something you have no possible way of knowing.

[creeksneakers2]

32. When she kept her emotions to herself

They said she was cold and unfeeling. Can't win with those folks.

[Tesha]

18. She didn't weep when she gutted the Consitution with the PATRIOT Acts, did she?

So don't try to spin it now that she's "weeping for
our country"; she's had her hands in the raping and
pillaging too.

Tesha

[frog92969]

65. Neither did

Edwards, or him AND Obama later when they helped her reauthorize it

[frog92969]

82. My mistake

Apparently Edwards left before he could vote on it a second time.

Original- http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/subs/detailed_vote_2001.htm

Reauthorization- http://www.lifeandliberty.gov/subs/detailed_vote_2005.htm

[defendandprotect]

75. Is she crying for soldiers who have been killed + maimed since the last election --- ????

[surfermaw]

42. The funny thing the media told this was going to happen all week end

[Andromeda]

50. Right on, oldtimer...

She's showing that she cares for her country and the people in it. The supporter who approached her seemed to really care how Hillary felt and how she's dealing with all this election stuff.

Hillary is a wonderful human being and she has lots of empathy for the less fortunate. She has worked tirelessly for children and women's health issues.

[Cant trust em]

58. This was Hillary at her most honest

She sounded very natural and open. It would have been flawless without the voice quaking, but ultimately I hope that most people will actually watch the video and not jump to a conclusion after reading a crappy headline (like I did). When that happens they'll see that this isn't really a big deal, and I'm an Obama supporter.

[Yael]

2. Okay, princess, stop crying and we will get you the pony and give you your crown back

There, there...

Sorry -- I ain't buying it. SHe tried to take Obama's message and it fell flat. Now she is going after the Edwards meme.

[jaxx]

3. I've made it a point not to knock any of the dem candidates,

b/c one will be prez and I'll support them all the way. But I have to say, this is a Hillary I've not seen before. She blew it with the last line:

Some of us are ready and some of us are not."

Pure politics.

[earthlover]

48. "Some of us are ready and some of us are not."

She also reminded us a while ago "if you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen".

Maybe she will be leaving the kitchen, because obviously the heat is getting to her.

While I feel sorry for her on a personal level, she is running for a high pressure job with lots of responsibilities.

Muskie cried, his campaign was through. Of course, he was a male candidate.

[stray cat]

4. Maybe its time more leaders cried about the state of the country

they should.

[fascisthunter]

6. Well... A Lot Of Money is Riding on her Getting into the White House

Wall Street won't be happy.

[balantz]

7. I heard it, and it didn't sound authentic to me.

By the way, from which other candidate have I heard the words "This is personal to me" before?

[MissDeeds]

20. To me either

With the inclusion of "change" and "this is personal for me", it seems she is taking her talking points from the other candidates. Hmmm...

[madmom]

10. the "manly" men out there are not gonna like a woman crying to try to get her way, just sayin'.

[harmonicon]

11. but women crying to get their way works best with the "manly" men - just sayin'. nt.

[humbled_opinion]

83. hmmm any reply from the Obama camp

About the Hillary Break down.. I mean maybe he can offer her the consolation prize of VP...

Get a grip this is politics this is what they do this is who they are... Her weep was as calculated as her planted questions.... I mean if it gets her elected she would cry everyday... Its time for real change not more of the same... I mean I'm not bashing her I'm just sayin its time that we win the WH not lose it to the Republicans because of someone that reminds America of the past... Lets look forward... Lets wake up on January 20th with real change in the WH with a new attitude and a promise of togetherness... oh see... now I've gone and got my keyboard all watered up from my own tears...

[oldtime dfl_er]

87. breakdown???

Did you people even SEE the "weepy moment"??

I am getting mighty fed up with Hillary literally unable to do anything right to some in these fora. I am a supporter of all three candidates at the moment, having sent money to all of them, but this Hillary bashing is really beyond the pale and is pushing me into her corner.

It seems this country is less ready for a woman president than I thought. The vitriol exhibited here, in these fora, among self-professed Democrats, is shocking. I've been watching for weeks as people here criticize Hillary and vilify her for all kinds of perceived behaviors from "cold" to "weepy" to "shrill" to "calculated" and everything in between. These are not words used for male candidates. Before you jump on me and shriek that I'm wrong, do a little homework and show me examples of where Obama, Edwards, Richardson or any other male candidate has been called those things. I'm not afraid to be proven wrong if that's the case.

Hillary's not perfect, nobody in this race is perfect. Everyone who has a voting record has things they should have done differently, and it is right and correct for us to point those (what we see as) errors out. But to make blanket generalizations about her character, her personality, her emotional makeup, is wrong.

Yes, I believe a lot of this is veiled sexism. Flame me up and down, criticize me and call me weak, easily led, or whatever else you want to, but the sexism I am smelling in this forum is downright frightening.

[alarimer]

98. It's shocking and disgusting

People are acting like the true assholes they are, I think.

Sexist fucking pigs, the lot of them.

[elocs]

12. Was there a group hug?

"After she spoke several of the people in the Cafe Espresso audience crowded around Clinton and offered sympathetic support."

Crying would certainly never fly for a man and today is no different than when Muskee did it in '72. I've seen on a dating site where the subject of a man crying for a valid reason comes up and not only is he crucified by the men for being a wimp, but half the women come down on him too. A woman crying has become such a cliche and I don't know how it would go over for a woman who wants to be the leader of the free world.

[bluestateguy]

13. She made a fool out of herself

Is that what she is going to do when the Right Wing Attack Machine starts in on her in the general election?

Start blubbering?

[JoFerret]

109. Not so it seems.

.

[dkofos]

14. Don't want to see us fall backwards. I think falling backwards is exactly

what the country needs to do.
And may I suggest we fall all the way back to the Carter administration
and start over from there.

[ixion]

16. that would be a good place to restart

end the 'wars' on drugs and terror, repeal all those laws that have been used to deprive us of civil liberties, and start moving in a more civilized direction.

[bean fidhleir]

19. Slick Willy, Slick Hilly - two of a kind

Lots of feigned "I feel your pain" followed by bigger police state, more job exports, more H1 worker imports, and hundreds of thousands of innocents killed.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

44. Welcome to DU, and if she's the nominee I look forward to your

departure!

:hi:

Only in the primaries are borderline FR comments trashing Pres and Sen Clinton allowed to stand.

MKJ

[Peace Patriot]

55. And who are you, the Nazi Thought Police? Criticism of our leaders is not allowed?

Are you a citizen or a subject, BleedingHeartPatriot?

I voted for Bill Clinton and I marched for a week with 50,000 other people against his goddamned global corporate predator "free trade" deals, in Seattle in 1999. And his Darth Vader cops assaulted me and my friends with pepper spray hoses and rubber bullets and beat us up, and his fawning war profiteering corporate news ('Telecommunications Act') monopolies slandered me and those 50,000 people all across the land. And, goddamnit, we were right! We embarrassed Clinton and, at his behest, we suffered for it, and we were right! But if we had been wrong, we still would have had the right to disagree! What do you want, the Communist Party or the Nazi Party, where we don't have that right?

Voting for someone doesn't make you OBEISANT to them, unless you come from the Holy Roman Empire school of democracy.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

62. "Slick Willy" was the RW mantra for years. That was my observation about that poster's comments.

I am more and more seeing poster after poster on this board attacking those whom it purports to support. The attacks on all three of the front runners have been vicious, and I will say again, that particular RW meme is one which I have not seen here until recently. At least you offer a substantiative reason why you harbor hostility toward Pres Clinton, presumably you feel at least this level of antipathy for Bush, but who knows anymore, at this free for all, character assassination driven board.

And, I imagine this poster will not be able to post this straight from Drudge/FAUX/Limbaugh et. al. remark if she is, in fact, the Democratic nominee.

MKJ

[Peace Patriot]

94. It is NOT "character assassination" to strongly oppose Clinton policy, and/or to

agree that the Clintons are "slick" operators on behalf of global corporate predators. What I saw in Seattle was a police state, mobilized in support of ruinous and traitorous policies of "free trade." Bill Clinton truly was/is a smooth operator for the Corporate Rulers. He fostered the "tech bubble" to create a few more millionaires, while abandoning the bulk of the middle class, the working class and the poor. I am particularly familiar with Clinton environmental policy, and I can tell you that it was mostly bullshit--not as extreme as the Bush Junta--but designed to put a "green" sort of veneer over policies that are literally destroying planet earth, our only home. This, "free trade" and a few other major Reaganite/Bushite policies aside, he ran a relatively decent government--totally lacking in vision and the kind of revolutionary reform (i.e., FDR) that is desperately needed--but not the federal wrecking crew that the Bush Junta is. The Katrina/FEMA disaster would never have happened under Clinton, for instance, nor the wholesale looting of the federal treasury by war profiteers.

Know who you're voting for--if you're voting for Hillary Clinton. That's all I'm saying. Eyes open. She is very similar to Bill, but without the winning personality. I voted for Bill/Al--pretty much on the basis of the boost to the poor that even a tiny increase in the minimum wage would provide. I had no illusions about their policies in their campaign for a second term. And I also fell prey to the scare tactic of the Republicans going further and further to the right, and off the fascist cliff--and pulling the political choices available to us further and further to the right, so that we have NO CHOICE but to "vote for" policies that we largely disagree with, and politicians who do not represent our interests on the whole. It's a bind that we MUST find our way out of.

I also don't have any illusions about who our Corporate Rulers--with their new 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY vote counting system--will permit into the White House. Until we restore transparent vote counting, we can expect little relief from corporate looting and war, now that the Bush Junta has taken us off the cliff of corporate fascism. Neither Hillary nor Obama will remedy this situation. Hillary is too pro-corporate and has been too pro-war. And Obama is too vague, too nice, and too malleable. Exxon-Mobile & cabal will eat him alive, in my opinion. They've grown used to having direct control of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, and will not settle for less, and will destroy any president who tries to act in the interest of the people, and will simply not permit a strong president to enter the White House. By Diebold, or by the bullet, they will prevent it.

A prediction: The key issue--possibly in the 2008 (s)election, and certainly in the first year of the next presidency--will not be Iraq or Iran. It will be South America, where Donald Rumsfeld is already using billions and billions of dollars stolen from our treasury to plan and begin execution of Oil War II. See...

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

...and tell me, where does Hillary Clinton stand on this matter? She, too, has called President Hugo Chavez a "dictator"--a corporate predator line that is based on absolutely no facts. (All factual information contradicts it.) Mark my words. Rumsfeld is planning this second war, and he intends us to pay for it (we are already doing so); he intends U.S. military intervention in South America in support of fascist thugs there who are planning more coup attempts; and he will use every dirty trick and black op in the book to force Congress and the President to go along with it, whether D or R. That's what's coming: Iraq/Vietnam in the Andes mountains. If Hillary is crowned emperor, she will likely play an LBJ role in this coming war. Obama probably won't like it, but would be forced to go along. (The oil giants--Occidental Petroleum, Exxon-Mobile and others--have a huge stake in this second oil war, and will do to Obama what they did to Jimmy Carter: manipulate oil reserves and prices to create long lines at the pumps, and painful costs, and will manipulate other situations as well, as Reagan did with the Iran hostages, to force Obama out, in four years, if he opposes this second oil war.)

We need a strong president who will bash corporate heads on our behalf. We will not be permitted to elect one. That's the situation. And, really, it does no good at all to say, 'Once Diebold/ES&S have selected our nominee, we must shut our traps and kneel and obey.' Why should we? We might vote for such a candidate; we might send money; we might volunteer--and have good reasons for doing so, because the alternative is so bad. But why should we not very loudly, very vociferously, at the same time, VOICE OUR DISSATISFACTION? I've been a good Democrat for more than forty years, and I goose-step to nobody. I protested LBJ's goddamn war. I protested Clinton's goddamn "free trade." And I will protest Hillary's pro-corporate, pro-war positions, and Obama's squishiness, if I think it is called for. We must try to hold our leaders accountable, even in these circumstances of "trade secret" vote counting by rightwing Bushite corporations and vast corruption in Washington DC. It is our obligation as citizens, and our obligation to our once great democracy and to the future.

You think I should be silenced? You think I should be thrown out of the party? You think I should be banned? What kind of Democrat are you, to make such undemocratic threats?

On using the phrase "Slick Willy," I think you have a point. We shouldn't use stupid-making rightwing memes. But the poster went on to mention quite valid criticisms, and so I forgave him/her the use of a slick phrase as a sort of shorthand for genuine beefs. And I think that's what you were reacting to. But try to be more exact in your analysis. In this case, I didn't see a Freeper at all, just sloppy usage. And I think it's very bad for Democrats to censor each other. Clearly, this party is our only hope as a vehicle for critically needed reform, and it must remain open as a forum for serious analysis and discussion, and must not become just a rah-rah, lockstep vehicle for corporate candidates and policies that fuck the American people over. I've seen too much of this--as if we can't think and be political advocates at the same time, as if politics itself turns us into stupid sheep. You also risk losing a large chunk of grass roots party support by having such an attitude. 'Bow to Diebold! Don't think about it!' Not me. That's not the party of Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson, and FDR, and Harry Truman, and JFK, and Bobby Kennedy, and Eugene McCarthy, and Paul Wellstone, and Sheila Jackson-Lee and Maxine Waters, and so many fighters and thinkers. We are the party of the people. We are the party of reform. We are the party of revolutionary democracy. We are the party of the labor movement and the civil rights movement. We are the party of new ideas. We are the party of renewal and progress. And we, the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, will not be silenced.

[ProudDad]

105. All of us on the real LEFT

called him "slick willie" -- especially after he sold the workers and the average people in this country down the river with NAFTA, welfare "reform" (screw the poor) and that fucking media give-away.

Fuck all the corporate shills -- and that means hillary too!!!!

[bean fidhleir]

102. If you think "Slick Willy" is copyrighted by the rightwing, you need to spend time

reading Sam Smith's Progressive Review (www.prorev.com). Sam has unimpeachable liberal and progressive credentials, and he has no use at all for either of the Clintons.

[LostinVA]

97. RW slurs and talking points are NOT allowed on here

And, Dem bashing is supposed to not be allowed.

[JoFerret]

110. Taking freeper hate trolls to task

is an honorable act.

[LostinVA]

96. What you said!

[tabasco]

88. Get lost freeper.

Better yet, join the army for your fuhrer.

www.goarmy.com

[LostinVA]

95. Nice Right Wing SLUR there, noob -- niiiiice

[ProudDad]

106. Except hillary is MORE SO!

She doesn't even pretend to be less beholden to her corporate capitalist masters. At least Willie pretended he wasn't their tool (for a few months)...

But it's not entirely her fault -- she's been a brain-washed corporate tool from the beginning...

[City Lights]

21. It shouldn't be personal. It's not about her.

Heck, it's not even about just the US anymore. It's about the entire planet. It's about all of us. Every living thing on the planet.

edited for clarity :dunce:

[Neshanic]

22. Now the Academy Award for best performance using another candidates lines is....

Hillary Clinton! Thanks to John Edwards for the script....

"The first time I didn't feel it, but this time I feel it, and I can't deny the fact that you like me, right now, you like me!".[

[Cant trust em]

23. There's no crying in baseball...

...or big time politics either.

[snooper2]

25. I'm sure she doesn't tear up..

every day a soldier is killed in Iraq....

[rodeodance]

27. do you?--does edwards? does obama?

[snooper2]

30. I have yes...

nt

[Mr_Monday]

26. If she wanted to win

She should've done stuff like this from the start. Regardless of its "authenticity", these acts of emotion help increase her likability. "Whoah. Hillary is human too?"

[superconnected]

28. Hard to believe the 6 year walmart lawyer has anything but Crocodile tears.

If she really cared, she's start supporting liberal issues and give up her neo-con politics.

As it stands, she might as well be bush in a dress. Okay, she doesn't have AS MANY old cronies, but she certianly supports her gang of thugs and some are the same as Bush's.

[acmavm]

31. THIS little incident makes me wonder if I could even hold my nose and

vote for this creature. I don't want any whiny wench who's playing on her gender one day and says its being used against her on another in the White House. Especially one who's such an opportunistic creature that she doesn't hesitate to use it when it suits her. She makes me ashamed. We've (women) have been living down this shit since right after the days of the primeval ooze.

[laconicsax]

34. What a sexist headline!

Look everyone, that woman candidate is getting all emotional and crying! Every reference to her voice breaking, eyes welling up, pausing "seemingly to control her voice," etc. is such bullshit. If you take out the quotes of what she said, you have an article that says "Hillary Clinton was emotional and cried at a recent event. She had difficulty keeping her voice from breaking and at the end, those in attendance offered their sympathies."

Such bullshit! They take what happened, she talked briefly about the importance of this election and how the pressing issues are very important to her, and make a news story about her emotional state.

edit: fixed typo

[earthlover]

49. Well....apparently she was crying....just like Edmund Muskie did.....

When Muskie cried during the primaries, and if my memory serves it was in New Hampshire, it tanked his candidacy. People were worried a candidate for president, who would have his finger on the nuclear button and face a lot of high pressure dealings, should not be too emotional.

So, I don't see it as sexist to hold a woman to the same standard as a man running for president was held to.

[laconicsax]

53. Take a look at these videos

http://www.johnedwards.com/media/video/nh-debate-fighting-powerful-interests/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qgWH89qWks

Both Edwards and Clinton are talking about things that are important to them on a personal level. Edwards gets at least as emotional at the end of his answer as Clinton did during hers. Why didn't the media pounce on him? Did Clinton actually tear up? Doesn't look to me like she did. She got a little choked up and softened her tone.

The article says,

"So," she continued, then paused, seemingly to control her voice as her listeners applauded again. "You know...

She paused when the applause started. There's no "seemingly to control her voice" to be seen in the video.

What business does "After she spoke several of the people in the Cafe Espresso audience crowded around Clinton and offered sympathetic support." have in this article? Isn't it standard fare for an audience of supporters to 'crowd around' a candidate following a speech? That can't be the case because the given reason they had to surround her was to 'lend a shoulder to cry on to an emotionally distraught woman.'

There's such a thing as holding candidates to the same standard. This isn't it. The language of the article is sexist. The frenzy over this as opposed to Edwards at the debate is because of something, and the simplest reason is sexism.

[Peace Patriot]

60. Good analysis, Laconicsax! We really, really need to learn to read between the lines

like this. The "story" is contrived--invented--and very likely double-standard sexist. You nailed it. And, Goddess as my witness, I oppose almost everything that Hillary Clinton has done, on many issues of vital importance to me and to our country. I don't like her. I don't trust her. And I even think that this incident, and this article, could have been cooked up by Hillary and her campaign with a complicit corporate media, for some purpose such as making her more "human"--although I'm not sure about that; it could be a hit piece. Really not sure. What I'm saying is the way to figure out what is going on in our political establishment is hard, critical, "reading between the lines" analysis like this. Challenge their choice of subjects. Challenge their headlines. Challenge their leads. Challenge their choice of quotes and of "experts." Challenge their videotape (never forget the doctored "scream" tape on Dean!) Challenge everything you see and hear. PRESUME that it is lies, because it so often has been. And go from there. Very good thinking on your part. You've convinced me that it is contrived and that it is sexist. Not sure of the purpose, but whatever the purpose is, those things are true, on their face. There was no story there. They made it up.

And IF Clinton is being 'swift-boated,' then we have to consider that as evidence that she does--contrary to the opinion of many of us--pose some sort of threat to the Corporate Rulers, beyond what we already know of the far rightwing faction of the Corporate Rulers, who have always hated her. If she wasn't involved in the contrivance, then we are looking at a 'swift-boating.' Difficult judgement call--but it's this kind of "entrail reading" and analysis of the "news" that helps us penetrate under the "Iron Curtain" of the corporate news monopolies, to figure things out. And thank you for it!

[madrchsod]

35. well that`s a tad bit over the top....

really don`t know what to say but that.

[rockybelt]

36. She heard Edwards

say that this is personal to him. Good Idea, she thought, I will make it personal too. I can sound genuine can't I?

Barf.:cry: :puke:

[surfermaw]

43. Wonder if she heard him today

Don't know exactly what he said, I know I thought of Truman when he said if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen

[liberalla]

80. You are SO RIGHT!

It was an OBVIOUS copycat/imitation of John Edwards comments in NH on Sunday. I saw it on CSPAN last night. He closed with 3 points. The third point was that you want to select a president for which these issues are personal. If they're not personally involved and committed, then when the going gets tough, the president may choose an alternate path, capitulation, or in some way avoid the showdown. He said that it wasn't political or academic for him, that it wasn't an abstract principle or tactical calculation. He said it was deeply personal for him, and when the fight gets tough, he won't retreat from the battle. He will fight.

It was very powerful, and he said it better than I've been able to rewrite/paraphrase it here.

When Hillary did that today--I couldn't believe it! She was copying the Edwards message! (which has been successful for Edwards)

[rockybelt]

81. And you could see it in his eyes. nt

[liberalla]

85. yes you could. eom

[eggplant]

38. Is this the equivalent of Dean's scream?

in that this will be spun as the moment when she jumped the shark?

[Caution]

40. Sheesh. Did it ever occur to anyone that she was being genuine? The venom here

is worse than anything the Republicans can dish out. Maybe you disagree with some of her positions but she has a solid voting record and is an accomplished woman who is running for President. She deserves some damned respect at the very least.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

45. I know, it's a shame and the worst offenders believe there is no way that they're being

misogynists.

Most of us women have seen it before, and understand there is no educating them, I'm afraid. Thank goodness for the smart, enlightened progressive men on this board, who, along with the smart, enlightened progressive women, see it for what it is and call it out.

MKJ

[earthlover]

61. The mysogynist arguement does not hold here at all....remember Muskie

Muskie was a MALE! Anyone disagree with this?

Muskie ran for president! ANyone disagree with this?

Muskie shed a tear or two in new hampshire and his campaign was basically over. The voters didn't want someone that emotional facing the pressures of the job of president. Anyone disagree with this?

Is it mysogynistic to hold Hillary to the same standard as Muskie?

Or is it a form of sexism to give Hillary a bye because she is female?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

63. I was responding in generalities, and if you don't see misogyny and I do, who's correct?

MKJ

P.S. someone earlier posted a list of male politicians who have cried and benefited from the publicity of displaying "caring" and "compassion", starting with Reagan. So, Muskie is an outlier in your example.

[earthlover]

69. I don't think of it as mysogyny at all.

And I am really getting tired of the mysogyny card being played every time Hillary is shown in a bad light.

I happen to sympathize with muskie too.

However, Hillary's frustration is coming out. In the debate we saw anger. Now we see choking up.

The question has to be posed: is this the mark of an EXPERIENCED politician?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

71. See, I saw it "reported" as choking up, yet watching the video did not see anything matching that

description.

No tears, no sobs, continues to articulate the entire thought with barely a pause.

So, why is this being treated as if she'd had some sort of Muskie-like event when the two aren't comparable? MKJ

[Chomskyite]

90. May I respectfully point out

. . . that it is 2007?

[superconnected]

52. Uh have you looked at her voting record?

It is NOT solidly dem.

[laconicsax]

73. And? But? So? Therefore?

[superconnected]

107. So much for an intelligent response from you.

People on this site regularly post congressional voting records. Hillary is in the most likely to vote along republican lines than dem lines during congression votes - thus going against the dems, every year she's been in office. Obama does way better than hillary in supporting dem issues.

I'm not going to waste my time searching for links on her because of your previous response. Enough of my time has been spent on you.

Ciao.

[kikiek]

68. Honestly the people on this board have turned me so against Obama I won't vote for him. His

followers are beyond words. It is disgusting.

[Tatiana]

41. Call me naive, but I think the tears were genuine.

I don't think she just teared up over her candidacy being "personal" (though I do think she really believes she deserves to lead this nation). I also think maybe there's a little guilt and anguish over past decisions and she's really being pulled in two directions. There's the Hillary that the handlers and managers project: the safe, calculating, and triangulating Clinton. But there's also Hillary Rodham, who is very passionate about civil rights, liberties, and family.

[Rockerdem]

67. It was exhaustion.

Her tears aren't forced. People's real emotions surface when they are dead-dog tired. The campaign is a meatgrinder that we & the media send our candidates through.

Stress brings out the human. I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I'm not going to use this one isolated episode to write her off.

[hedgehog]

72. That's what I figured when I heard aboutit this morning and I defended

Senator Clinton. This evening I saw it on the news, and combined with her words, it looked like a last ditch calculated effort to get votes.

Check out the video here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#22543308

(Sorry about having to sit through a commercial first)

"Some of us are right and some of us are wrong" !!?! When I saw and heard what happened, it looked staged.

[defendandprotect]

77. Sure . . . it's exhaustion . . . coupled with losing ---

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

51. "My legacy!"

:cry:

[Phred42]

54. Now She's Stealing Edwards Thunder

Both of the Big Buck money DLC dems are learning from Edwards and stealing from him.

Change and this is Personal are both issues that Edwards has been stating from the beginning. The way these images resonate with the People was not lost on either Obama or Clinton and they have both now riped Edwards off.

Unfortunately THEY have the money to make people THINK that THEy came up with these on their own. They did not.

The big rip off.

Oh well. The DLC is all about Politics as usual.

[ckramer]

56. Being a president satisfies her vanity greatly

I guess ordering people around is fun!

I want to be president too!

[kitty1]

57. Unfortunately, this will be construed by some as a sign of weakness..

especially from the men out there.
They will point out that if Hillary can't stand the heat of an election without getting emotional and upset, then she won't make it as president when the going gets tough and a potential crisis of huge proportions occurs. (9/11 or full out war in ME)
She is so genuine and sincere as a candidate, but many out there will consider strength as a very fundamental attribute to being president. Especially now.
Bush was too full of himself to ever show any true display of genuine emotion. He was brought up by Poppy to appear hardcore and tough no matter what the situation all his life. Be a man and all that. Now he's totally desensitized.
I do feel sorry for what Hillary is going thru. We can only imagine how tough a campaign like this would be with all the venom flying back and forth.
And that's just within her own party.
If she can keep it together thru NH, and show she has steel cajones like the best of them when the going get's tough, she could do alright.

[earthlover]

66. I sympathize...her frustration really came out in the debate in her anger...now it is coming out in

..another way.

She must be in a lot of pain.

However, a male candidate who would go to tears like that would have his campaign destroyed. As in Edmund Muskie when he cried....

I think she should stick to being Senator. It is not as if Senator is a low life job....

[peace13]

59. If she shed a tear for the dead soldiers

I would feel differently. Boo hoo Hill, join the rest of us in a big ol' cry. Cry me a river!!!

[NoodleyAppendage]

64. Whaaa. The Presidency was NOT your birthright. Get over yourself.

The sad FACT that she'll have to deal with...she's not as charismatic or likeable. Her voice is shrill; she's milquetoast on the stump; and her laugh has become a parody.

J

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

70. I take the possible destruction of America VERY personally.

And she'd bloody well have a VERY good plan for fixing it.

[defendandprotect]

74. This is basically Edwards comment --- ?? !!!

[gasperc]

76. looked like a very human, personal moment, I don't get all the digs

and I'm an Edwards supporter. we can all be dicks sometimes

[defendandprotect]

79. For me, the "digs" are here because her sensitive behavior and her votes don't match --- !!!!

It's not believable ---
this is a cut-throat lady, supporting a husband who ended 60 years of Welfare guarantees ---

And voting to give Bush authority to go into Iraq --- but no . . . that's not
what she meant? And now voting to give Bush authority to go into Iran . . . but
no that's not what the vote means --- ??? !!!

And, as Elizabeth Edwards just pointed out in introducing John to speak at a small gather in NH --- see C-span --- Hillary takes more money from the Defense industry and the health care industry than any Democrat or any Republican!!!

So ... any chance that will add up to more war and no single-payer health care????

I think so ---

[Miss Chybil]

78. I don't know why I even come to DU anymore.

I don't as much as I used to. I didn't even donate this last time around because I've been so disheartened by all the hatefulness going on around here. I lost my star and everything. Not that I have ever been able to donate much, or that I in any way feel I am "punishing" DU by not donating. I'm sure they don't miss my little bit of money. I just don't FEEL like giving anything, anymore. It's so ugly around here. You remember, it wasn't so long ago people were complaining about John Edward's haircuts. That was nothing compared to this. Heck, the last presidential primary was nothing compared to this.

It amazes me how shrill some people can be - and I'm not talking about Hillary.

I think I'll take a pause now. I'll come back, and get my star back, when the majority of DU goes back to bashing Republicans instead of each other. Until then... peace... and may the next President of the United States of America be a Democrat!

[Chomskyite]

89. It's making me cringe too

I am too far to the Left to start cackling over horserace bullshit. Yes, Hillary cried when she spoke about the stakes of this campaign. I've cried too about the way this country has been hijacked and its most beautiful principles desecrated.

If one of these candidates wins the Big Enchilada, things will become SO much better for a lot of working people and children. If one of these three wins, we immediately have a chance to rebuild our moral standing in the world. If one of these candidates wins, nuclear war will be much less likely. If one of these candidates wins, more fat-cats will pay their fair share back to the country that made them so rich. And more fatcat scum who poison us and kill us and rip us off will go to jail.

To me it's unthinkable to write ridiculous posts denying the humanity of the rest to advance the agenda of another one. The whole idea of the damn party is to respect EVERYBODY's humanity.

Peacebird, Tisha, Yael, bluestateguy, bean fidhleir, others, I ask respectfully: what the Hell are you doing?

[Baclava]

84. Elections are a bloody business, have been forever

Looks like this one won't be any different.

[Maccagirl]

92. Maybe, just maybe that's why problems don't get solved

and become crises.
When are we going to stop tolerating this "bloody business" and demand some truth and civility?

[Emillereid]

86. I think her tears were real enough, but the stated reason for her angst

doesn't do it for me. I think she choked up because she fears defeat -- I think it is personal -- about her. She has assumed for so long that she had it in the bag. She believed the MSM spin. I don't think she was shedding tears for the 'country.' And besides why does she think if she is not elected that that means the country goes up in smoke. I think it would do quite well under Edwards' leadership, or for that matter, Obama's. And under Kucinich it would actually be great!

[Triana]

91. ...(n/t)

[Phillycat]

99. Whether feigned or not, it's bad.

If they were feigned, it's another example of manipulative nasty politics.

If they were real, I think it's even worse. Being leader of the free world is not actually a cakewalk, despite Chimpy's performance of the past 8 years. If the campaign and stress has gotten her to the point of tears, imagine what a global military or financial crisis will do. You CANNOT show weakness, you need to be in control of yourself all the time. And that goes for a woman or a man in the job, and I am female and a feminist so don't give me any of that bullshit either. She needs to KEEP IT TOGETHER.

[sentelle]

100. yes, Ms. Clinton, it IS personal

You have sided with the insurance lobby over the needs of americans while in the senate. Every time. And then when president, will guarantee Insurance company profit. I take That personally.

You have sided (with your votes) with the Iraq war, strapping the economy, maiming and killing for a cause: bush's buddy's profits, and the ability to show you are not soft. I take THAT personally.

You have enabled the present administration to run roughshod across the environment, without even a word of caution. I take That personally.

Listen, Ms. Clinton, we know you are smart, but don't treat us as fools. We know the difference between personal ambition and personal responsibility. The fact that you assume we don't, well, I take that personally.

Unfortunately, if I cry, no one will point a camera at me, and no one will care.

Its your bed, lie in it.

[ProudDad]

104. ...

:puke:




On Edit: I saw this display -- totally phony...

[GoddessOfGuinness]

108. While Hillary is not my first choice, I don't agree that this was phony...

It sounds to me like her voice is tired. Voices crack when they get tired...especially when speaking with emotion.

She may not be my fave, but I'd still vote for her over any of the rethug candidates.

[JoFerret]

111. All the Hillary bashing on this thread ...

...was ugly and unseemly yesterday.
And all the premature crowing was vicious.
I am glad Hillary has stayed in the race to fight another day.
We don't need to tear her down.
Go Edwards. Congratulations Clinton.