wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comment from hjs
Date: June 7, 2008, 12:16 pm

hello?!

Comment from Marilyn Bakun
Date: June 7, 2008, 12:39 pm

would the politics of the Senate permit Hillary Clinton to become majority leader. She has established good relationships across the aisle. What a truly powerful position this could be for her= Far better than the possibility of Vice President. Perhaps the Senate could work better (a novel idea?) This could permit Obama to easily choose the candidate who would help him win the Presidency. This would give her a strong voice and allow her to be a strong ally for the Obama presidency.

I do not know why this is not an issue widely discussed a reported.

thank you

Comment from RJ
Date: June 7, 2008, 1:31 pm

The “America will be stronger when …” and “when Barack Obama becomes president” refrain of the speech was very powerful, and probably came the closest to going after John McCain directly.

I do hope her sad and angry supporters around the country will have the period of mourning they need–and go back to work. It’s important.

Comment from Ann
Date: June 7, 2008, 1:35 pm

Wonderful speech and happy to see hear her efforts to unite the party. For once, I sincerely admired her attitude and generosity…enough so that I would consider voting for her in 2012.
I was disheartened to hear to booing, although it noticably dim as she spoke on, a testament to the power of her speech. That gives me hope.

I don’t believe that she lost due to a “glass ceiling,” but because she has lost her composure so many times during the race and her campaign tactics were devisive. But today, I liked here. She is tenaciouos and was inspiring. Thank you Hillary.

Comment from Liz
Date: June 7, 2008, 1:39 pm

She should not be considered for VP, she has so much more experience than Obama it would be a step down. She should be appointed to the Supreme Court or be considered for Secretary of State (at the least). VP is a filler job.

I was on the Clinton/Obama fence (hey, I was for Edwards!) so was pretty neutral about her speech but she completely wowed me! So graceful with conviction and appreciation. I think she will be known more for her concession speech than anything she said during her campaign. A class act.

Comment from Derek Tutschulte
Date: June 7, 2008, 5:46 pm

Had she only spoken like that during her campaign. Sounds like she finally got the message.

Comment from ___
Date: June 7, 2008, 7:17 pm

the exact date of the show HRC called in on was December 8, 2003.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/2003/12/08

Comment from Chris
Date: June 8, 2008, 9:04 am

I like Marylyn’s suggestion . . . that Sen. Clinton be offered a position as Senate Majority (or for the moment Minority) Leader. Like Marylyn, I’m not certain that this is a politically feasible check that Obama could cash . . . perhaps if he offered Minority Leader Mitch McConnell the VP nomination, and that wouldn’t be a bad VP nomination (though I would really like to see Jim Webb filling out the ticket).

I like the idea of Clinton in holding a position in the Senate’s leadership because she might actually do some good their. I want to be clear hear . . . I greatly dislike and distrust the Clinton’s. Notice that I point my animus at both husband and wife. And I roundly reject the ‘misogyny’ brush with which so many of her critics have been smeared. Misogyny? Nothing could be further from the truth . . . I’m a feminist! I would love to see a woman in the Whitehouse . . . just not this woman, not another Clinton. As VP she would almost surly hamstring an Obama presidency into irrelevance and leave the party in shambles. The reality is that I dislike and distrust Hillary for the same reasons that I learned to dislike and distrust Bill.

The gist of this is that they are both lying, conniving, narcissistic, political hacks. They have never offered us anything more than a cult of personality. Indeed, Hillary is everything that Bill is without the ‘Bubba’ charm. Does anyone remember how he destroyed the Democratic Party, leaving it in shambles, losing the House and Senate, all while lying his way to post-Monica popularity. Hasn’t this campaign confirmed that she is just a less charming version of him? That she would knock over her own mother to gain a political advantage? Do we really want to promote the fortunes of another lying, conniving, rabidly ambitious Clinton? Of course, these assessments are rarely denied by Clinton supporters. Their defense is more often than not Machavelien; to wit, critics like myself are called naive. All politicians, we are told, are cravenly ambitious liars. That is simply a mark of how low are standards have become—a standard that the Clintons have done so much to coarsen. The reality is that all those who seek high office are ambitious but many are decent, honorable Americans who balance their personal ambition with high ideals. Let’s not let the Clinton machine allow us to forget that, or forget how honorable, decent, and inspiring are presidential candidate, Barrack Obama is.

I should say one other thing about her speech. She struck an ardently feminist note. It was a new, strident argument about who she is and what she had accomplished. For some, this will lionize her campaign, making her a progressive feminist hero. That is surely what she intended her speech to do. But accepting this would be the truly naive. Where were her feminist arguments for the past twelve months? Only now, in a speech in which she was supposed to be promoting the fortunes of her party, the party that has and will continue to fight for the rights of women, does she suddenly find religion. I might well believe that now she has lost, that she has been the victim of some misogynist plot, that she is martyr for the feminist cause. Such a morose, self-serving assessment would certainly fit with the Clinton narcissism. Oh please, my fellow Democrats, let us not follow the Clinton’s down their troubled path of personality again. Can’t we find some place for them where they can’t hurt the party or the country anymore?