The speech
Submitted by Stan4Clark on June 7, 2008 - 5:11pm.
clinton | Hillary | Hillary Clinton | Democratic politics
I watched the speech not for what she would say, but for what she would NOT say. I wondered to what extent she would say things I suspected she did not believe.
Other than Obama's "determination" and "grit," she did not talk about Obama's character and integrity. She did not talk about his experience. She did not talk about "hope" or "change." She didn't talk about "the new politics." She concentrated on policy -- HER policies and hot buttons. For the most part, she could have made the same speech about any of the other candidates if it had been one of them instead of Obama to beat her.
It was a very good speech. My conclusion: In the whole race, nothing became her more than her leaving it.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
Subj: Hillary's speech: video
Date: 6/7/2008 2:55:56 PM Central Daylight Time
From:
Dear Mitch,
We hope you had a chance to see Hillary's historic speech today. You can view an excerpt on our website.
Click here to watch the video excerpt of Hillary's speech.
Anglachel dissects the speech in her own inimitable way
Money quotes....
......And now we get to the heart of the matter. This speech was a concession speech only in a formal sense. Hillary has surrendered nothing. She is being gracious and is directly advocating all Democrats act in the interest of retaking the White House and creating the conditions under which we can seize those opportunities and benefit Democratic constituencies. Hillary has served notice that she will do everything within her power to make this happen.
If it fails, it is all on Obama's head. If he fails to heed her advice and pledge himself to fighting for the concrete material needs of Democratic constituencies, he will lose. If he tries to appease the Right rather than support the Left, he will lose. If he continues to disdain the messy, contradictory, not sufficiently PC particularity of the Democratic base, he will lose. And, should he fail, she will, without rancor and without revenge, pick up the pieces, go on with the fight and never surrender to the foes of democracy. She will always be on the front lines.
All of which is a very long way of getting to the point of this post. In the arguments about "unity", the question, united to what end?, does not get addressed. Or, rather, it is answered in one way only - that Hillary and her supporters need to stop their opposition and get behind Da Winnah.
What this speech does in its performance is provide the other part of the answer. The candidates view unity differently. Obama's calls for unity are for his sake, as supported by his admonition that his supporters should not think of themselves as Democrats or Republicans, but as Obamacans. Hillary's calls for unity are for our sakes, to achieve specific things that make our lives demonstrably better, from equal rights for all to economic sanity to sustainable energy. She does not threaten us with a defeat of Roe v. Wade, but asks us to consider how laws as such can be improved. (I also happen to know that she advocates a constitutional right to privacy, which is really what the Right is fighting against in Roe v. Wade, protection of citizen's privacy from state intrusion.)
With Hillary, unity of the party is for the sake of the constituents, the power to act on behalf of and in the interests others in very concrete ways. Her laundry list of objectives and initiatives so ridiculed by the press corps got people's attention because it addressed their needs and fears. It demonstrated to them that this was someone who gave a damn about their particular issues and really would try her hardest to fix what was broken and create what was missing.
With Obama, he falls into the usual trap of the Stevensonians, praising unity as such, considering it a good in and of itself, and not worrying too much about the messy, grubby, delivering the goods kind of politics that so upsets the technocrats. If we only reform the system and make it all rationalized and fair and formally equal, then what results will be satisfying to the public. Um, no. It is not, as some would have it, that Obama is some kind of false front, a crypto Libertarian/Republican/Communist/Black Nationalist/Islamacist/[Fill in your favorite crazy ass conspiracy boogey monster here] as much as that he does not make delivering the goods to the voters the center of his political cause. It is abstract, formal, reasssuring to those who are already on-board and doing OK, but simply cannot speak to the woman working three jobs and frantic for health insurance.....
“No self respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her self.” - Susan B. Anthony, 1872
I completely agree with you!
I heard a commentator say that there were certain "boxes" that Hillary had to "check off" in her speech such as officially suspending her campaign, endorsing Obama, and encouraging her supporters to help Obama. You are absolutely right that "she did not talk about Obama's character and integrity. She did not talk about his experience..."
Hillary in my opinion checked off all of the necessary boxes that she had to and then she focused a lot on her supporters, her agenda, and what is at stake in the election. She was forced to give this speech as the evidence clearly shows:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15707
ANALYSIS: Why I am taking Hillary's "endorsement" of Obama with a grain of salt!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 6, 2008 - 5:04am.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0806/05/acd.01.html
ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES
Barack Obama Meets With Hillary Clinton
Aired June 5, 2008 - 22:00 ET
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): "In the lead-up to Hillary Clinton's endorsement of Barack Obama, Clinton's most loyal supporters, her New York delegation, got behind her rival.
REP. CHARLIE RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: Outstanding candidate and, in our collective opinion, he has won the nomination.
MALVEAUX: Thursday's event is part of a highly-orchestrated public effort to make the best of what some saw as a serious Clinton blunder: her decision not to concede the race Tuesday night.
RANGEL: The New York congressional delegation is with her until the end, but we thought the end was the end.
MALVEAUX: Clinton loyalist Charlie Rangel helped negotiate where that end would be. Wednesday, in a series of conference calls with Hillary Clinton, Rangel expressed lawmakers' private frustrations that some were ready to quickly endorse Obama and move on.
Clinton aides tried to convince the delegation to wait until after Clinton herself gave Obama the nod. The compromise? This tortured announcement today.
RANGEL: We come here collectively to endorse the decision that's been made by our fearless leader who comes as a member of the state of New York that makes us so proud..."