Does it drive them nuts that she’s so classy and gracious?
The Obamabots I mean. The Hillary haters.
I wish I had a full transcript of Hillary’s victory speech tonight. It was wonderful. Pure Hillary: smart, down to earth, classy.
The most moving part of the speech was when — and I wish I had the transcript — she talked about how this Presidential race is a landmark in the two-century-long project of moving America forward. She said that when the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia 200 years ago, “neither I nor Senator Obama nor many of you” were part of their dream. But through the efforts of so many over so many years — the abolitionists, the suffragists, the progressives, the civil rights heroes, etc., the American dream has expanded. Because of them, she said, she grew up taking for granted that women could vote. Because of them, Chelsea grew up taking for granted that children of all races could attend the same schools.
And now, she said, “because of you,” today’s children will grow up taking for granted that either a woman or an African-American can be President of the United States.
The crowd went over the moon. I actually blubbed.
I don’t know what kind of cognitive dissonance is required to watch this woman and hate her. It is beyond my understanding.
12 Responses to “Does it drive them nuts that she’s so classy and gracious?”
-
YAB says:
I’ve noticed that since Iowa and it’s one of the reasons (including, I must admit, the vicious press she’s gotten) that turned me into a Hillary supporter.
All of her concession speeches have been gracious, but so have her winning speeches.
Obama continues to be a sore loser, something pointed out in The Australian back in Feb.(http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23140008-7583,00.html).
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:21 am EST -
simply wondered says:
a note from the british media: while they do still keep mentioning hillary is behind (which seems fair enough as it’s true) in the wake of her win in pa, they are this morning mooting the points that:
1) the momentum is with her campaign;
2) pa is a ’swing state’ and obama’s ‘weakness’ with the reagan democrats will be a significant factor if he wins the nomination;
3) do they want a nominee ‘who can’t finish’they also mentioned the exclusion of the two states on the naughty step (that sounds democratic in a bushesque way!)
i just repeat these without comment or analysis (because i have no idea how accurate or indeed relevant they are). but i thought it might be of interest to have an early uk reaction. (being as how we all have lots of votes over here…)so 10% in high heels backwards… i couldn’t do that.
-
simply wondered says:
and i’m glad you blubbed, vi. i was like that in 1997 with the young radical tony blair.
let’s at least live the dream for a few years before worrying about it all turning to shite… -
therealUK says:
transcript here Dr Socks:
-
jacilyn says:
I think the key is that they do NOT watch Hillary.
They hate her without looking at her.
It’s easier that way.
-
blondie says:
I am wondering if the actual popular votes of Michigan and Florida were counted — not the delegates, the votes of the individual people who voted in their Democratic primaries — if Senator Clinton actually comes out ahead in the popular vote.
-
blondie says:
Oops. Sorry for the dumb question, I just now looked more closely at the screen capture in the above post. She is ahead in the popular vote. Are Obama supporters saying that the votes of people, regular unsuperdelegate people, who voted as Democrats in Michigan and Florida shouldn’t count?
-
slythwolf says:
Are Obama supporters saying that the votes of people, regular unsuperdelegate people, who voted as Democrats in Michigan and Florida shouldn’t count?
Yes.
Obamabots in Michigan are saying Michigan’s votes shouldn’t count. Unfortunately I know some of these people personally.
What I don’t understand is why Michigan and Florida can’t have revotes or something.
-
david stewart says:
Yes it was fun finally watching the news and watch Chris and Keith look for ways to downplay the victory. Yes she had a lead, 6 months and 6000 bad press stories ago. He, (BO) had/has 40 million dollars, more good press than Mother Teresa ever got and TV ads running 24/7. And he still lost. White guys gave her a majority. It makes some-alot of men like Chris and Keith and Andrew S, crazy that a woman will be commander in chief. Rather it be an unknown with a cool factor but no real track record or experience behind him. They convince themselves that to hate her is okay as to remain objective. Which is bullshit when Chris M refers to BO’s speaking style as Lincoln-esque. It also twists their balls that they know she can win and it is unclear if Obama can win in Nov. I love this blog and all the blogs on Feminist blogs. Sisterhood is forever!!!
-
Dalal says:
Yaaay! Finally, some good news for those of us who aren’t brainwashed!! ^_^
Just today, I had two people try to convince me that Hilary’s such an evil liar and that if she wins nomination–note, not presidency– they’re moving out of the country.
‘Cause of her ‘lies’. >> If anyone knows of these ‘lies’, please let me know…and please help me get some concrete proof that’ll say that if HIllary’s bad, Obama’s just as bad- ’cause they’re both HUMAN, DAMMIT.
-
simply wondered says:
that’s would i would do if i caught someone lying - leave the country. it’s the only proportionate response.
in the uk before any election you have a stream of people in the media saying ‘if labour get in, i shall leave the country because………’ (fill in blank with tax, crime, immigrants, bunny murdering, insufficient fascism etc) and of course my second thought is ‘yes please! in fact, just leave now anyway’ - the first thought is generally ‘oh they’re still alive?!?’
-
simply wondered says:
first sentence above ‘that’s what i would do’
bloody fingers…
