by
Bill's Spirit
Member since:
March 3, 2006 Tissues For Hillary
January 07, 2008 05:50 PM EST
(Updated: April 11, 2008 02:05 PM EDT)
views: 198
|
rating: 10/10
(24 votes)
|
comments: 72
There's a video airing on my cable channels. Hillary Clinton getting emotional at a luncheon. Apparently it's personal, not just political to her. Maybe this will win her points with some people. She looked tired and worn; frazzled might be a good word. I dare say she looked a little bit plastic. Maybe it was the lighting and her makeup, but I found myself wondering if she was trying out a new strategy, rather than actually being candid. Maybe she has temporarily lost her ability to be candid. I can only imagine how easy it would be to get lost and worn down under the demands of constantly maintaining campign winning veneers. I'm sure her life is as much ruled by the campaign managers and the media, as it is by herself. Watery eyes and a shakey voice is a tough thing to let loose in public. It can too easily be read as a breakdown; rather than a welling up of passionate drive. It's good to hear that it's personal to her. That this isn't a game to her. That it's about the future of our kids and all of us together. But I think it's fair to say that none of her Democratic competition think of this election as only a game to be won or lost. The major selling point which each Democratic candidate has hit fully on the mark is that they totally care about what's been going on in our country; and that they definetly will change things if elected. I like Hillary. I hope the trail isn't getting to her. Maybe she just needs a hug, a toddy and a good night's sleep. -- 07 January 2008 -- Bill's Spirit is honored to have been selected as a member of Gather's "Election 2008 People's Press Corps" Bill's Spirit is an Artist, Writer, Poet, Philosopher currently wordsmithing from a humble digital forge in small town Ohio. The works of the man behind Bill's Spirit have been published in small alternative and amateur presses since 1986. Before that, they just filled notebooks, took up space on walls and gathered dust in piles and boxes. --
Tags:
political commentary,
hillary,
election 2008,
candidates,
us politics,
news,
election 08,
clinton,
independent,
politics
To Groups:
!!! Post It, We're Not Picky !!!, *~* We won't tell you what you can & can't post here, if you don't tell us what we can & can't post on Gather (unless you run Gather). Now, let's all write our lil hearts out and/or have some fun! ~*~, A Place for Opinions, Affairs of the State, Americans 4 America, Americans for America, Anything and Everything, Current Events 2, Daily Chit Chat & More ( any thing ), Democratic Vision, Differing Views, dumping ground for good and bad, Election 2008, FREE SPEECH AREA FOR EVERYONE ON GATHER, Free Thinking, Freedom Cafe, Gather News Essential, Gather Politics Essential, Gather Soup, I want it All, I'll Take IT!!!, Independent Bent, Independent Minds, Intelligent politics, IS IT NICE TO POINT - WELL YES IT IS !!!, It is my Opinion, Journal of Social Commentary, KindredSpirits, Left Of The Right, Open Debate, Opinionated Opinions, Political Boxing, Political Moderates, Political Ohio, Political Open Discussion, Political, Social, and Religious Views Forum, PolitiCat, politics and international news, Politics Today, Post It If You Got It!, ! Post Office @ Gather Town !, Post stuff of any kind - whatever comes to your mind!, Post Whatever the Heck You Want!!, Posting Frenzy, Progressive Politics, Public Forum, Purely Political, Race for President 2008: The Democrats, ramblings and other misc, Random Musings, Rejected? Never here, post it all!, Speak your Mind~Anything Goes, The Family Diner, The Political Middle, The Posting Station, Today's Clutter, Troublemakers, TrueAmericans, Under the Sun :), United We Stand to Protect Our Liberty, Our Borders and Our Constitution, Vote 2008!, We want it all, What's on your Mind, ! Whatever Floats Your Boat (Post Almost Anything), YaDaYadaYada, Your Candidates for 2008 Presidential Race, ZZZ Article, ZZZ Photo, ZZZ Video, ZZZ Anything! Points for it all!, The Works of Bill's Spirit
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
|
|
More by Bill's Spirit |
|||||||
rate
email
print
link to this page
About Gather |
Engagement Marketing |
Make New Friends |
Gather Points |
Advertise on Gather |
Gather Press |
Privacy |
Terms of Service |
Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16865, "Oz"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.
Comments: 72
What got to me in the coverage, was suggestion by male pundits it was all fake and a bid sympathy. I don't think they realizes how typical his reaction to a woman showing emotion was. It is the reason professional women tend to hold in their emotions. Whether it is anger or tears it is not something women are supposed display unless it is related to harm done to their family. Then and only then is becomes universally acceptable. I still expect some fool to suggest it must be that time of the month for her even though at her age she should be well past having to deal with that time of the month.
You're kidding, right? No, they think of it as a game in the same way a professional athlete thinks of a championship game. It's naive to think that winning the election isn't more important to all the major party candidates than anything else.
Maybe I'm jaded by a lifetime of citizenship but I can't believe that any major party politician is interested in anything but getting (re)elected. Like Mae West said, "Goodness had nothing to do with it."
I think it's a serious mistake to think of the politician personae as human beings.
On one hand, it strikes me that we've become so cynical, that many people will assume it was all fake. A ploy to seem warmer, more human. I hope it wasn't.
On the other hand, they're all tired. They've all been fighting, and traveling and speaking etc. Does her breakdown make her seem weak? Just like a woman to break down under pressure. (That's not me talking, that's my fear of what others could say)
I don't have a third hand, but if I did...maybe it will win her points. Maybe people were looking for something from her that would let her connect.
I don't know. For me, it seems like a big mistake.
One foolish friend told me he can't see a woman as president, as she would have to be the "leader" of the armed forces. And that the armed forces wouldn't take orders from a woman. (Are we all laughing yet?) I do believe he'll never say that out loud again--at least in mixed company. LOL!
At least I think I don't have to worry about her invading another country to commit heinous war crimes, at least until after each, every, and all diplomatic avenues have been exhausted. If she could stay the course with Bill (bless his heart, too) during that republican-breaded and fried trial staged to discredit all dems everywhere...then I think she'll get through whatever pre-election trials face her.
Still undecided, but am reading, reading, reading. Hill has the labor vote, and that counts some with me. Looking at Edwards, and Obama, too. Keeping my options open. I also hope that any one of them can and would effect the repairs to the constitution that are needed after the last 7 years of sleight of head that's been going on.
Has anyone done a comparative study on how they voted in the last 2 years on the topics we all seem to care about? I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison on yes/no voting records for all three of them.
In the general election the Republican would be falling all over themselves to have her to run, the lady just got to much baggage with Bill. She has been prop up by the Republicans and media even before she made known to the public she was run.
Sorry Hillary is not the one ,tears or no tears.
...What is really interesting, is, no one who ever came out on top of the vote in any Iowa caucus has ever been elected President...
It will be exciting to watch what happens more so in February than now...quite frankly I am sick of the Pundits commenting and yelling over one another what they think and know...its so annoying...
Personally I am going to keep my money on Hillary...I think she is going to take it and she will have my vote...May the best person win, as long as they are not Republican
......but I must say Spirit Bill I love your comment " People should be treated like they matter." I wish someone would have put that suggestion in the White House suggestion box for Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush....
Excellent and compassionate write up!
The news told us there were tears so it has to be true.
In place of money or my vote, I will send her tissues.
If she can't handle the running for office, she can't handle the office.
It has always been an inescapable lesson for women (an a few men) to learn that there is no place for tears in the business world. I'm not saying I agree with this credo but I do acknowledge it. It took me a couple of near-disaster misty-eyed moments to train myself away from what would normally be a very natural reaction for me. For many women, stressful situations (of any kind) can bring tears.
But I think we can all agree that we don't want our president bawling because the votes didn't go his/her way that day.
I am saddened by all that just label her with words from years of republican attacks and vitriol.
I am from NH and am Independent with a choice not made. One thing for sure though is that I will not make my decision based on the spin of pundits or the attacks of the party puppets! Peace!
When I attended the Iowa Democrat Caucuses as an undecided the Hillary supporters looked at me and said Wouldnt It Be Nice To Have a Woman in The White House?
Jimmy U. - If tears had flowed down her face I expect the media would have labeled it crying.
Lori F. - Personally, I believe that her feminine side is one of her best aspects; but it can certainly not be her only aspect.
Playing that card too much will kill her in the election.
She needs to always show her strong and wise professional side and let the feminine just be part of the background; like most dedicated working-world and public service women (and men) do.
Needs some violins, I think.
She (and her campaign managers) probably realized that her smear tactics and hard ass image weren't raising her poll statis - time to try something new.... "oh woe is me...." was the next logical approach.
She is a puppet. A puppet to her agenda. A puppet to the lobbyists. She will do ANYTHING it takes to win - whether it's put up her dukes or cry... She will do it.
Mass. Rep. John Olver holds a PhD from MIT, has the benefit of 60+ years, is not known for maverick ideas or positions. When 2/3's of his constituents voted for impeachment, I believe, it was last fall, he told them he could not support that effort. He said it was his belief that if the democrats move on impeachment of Bush and Cheney, Bush would invade Iran, call a national emergency, declare martial law, and cancel elections. Ralph Nader announced this in a clip a short while back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA
Would a black ops operation in an American city, blamed on Al Qeada, do the same thing? The executive orders and legislation giving the executive the power to declare US territory a war zone, and subject to extraordinary executive powers, such that military forces may be deployed is in place. All we need is the trigger to be pulled.
What is at stake?
A lot.
It also is interesting how people perceive a candidate that cries. When it's a woman, she is seen as manipulative or weak. A man is also seen by some as weak. Elections have been lost by this. Other times, a man crying is perceived as a good thing. Generally men are seen as very intellectual and when they cry, it shows some compassion.
Rather than judge anyone for this very human show of emotion, why not just allow them the opportunity to feel what they're feeling and release some stress without trying to make it more than it is. Personally, I wouldn't trust any candidate that didn't cry on occasion.
Oh, you're right! She IS physically and emotionally exhausted, so I'm sure that is what made it easier for her to play the part of the caring and sentimental politician all of a sudden, and what made it possible for her to fool those who want to be fooled.
Believe me, I'm not viewing Hillary's display of emotion as weak or manipulative because she's a chick..... I have NEVER viewed Hillary as a chick in this race and have written an article about that fact.
If it's truly exhaustion and overwhelming scheduling, I say this shows she can't handle the heat and must get out of the kitchen.
Like Sue B. said, it's all about the timing. It's awfully suspicious that when leading in all polls and attacked, she was more than willing to fight back... But when she has lost Iowa and is facing a double-digit decline in the polls in NH, now all of a sudden she is too exhausted to fight and instead breaks down.....
Give me a break...... The name of her game is manipulation - always has been. This is just another example of how she knows how to play the game.
This just points up the stupidity of our current primary process.
Her concern is for Hillary and Hillary alone.
How sad it would b for her to come this far and fail.
If you substitute the phrase "any candidate" for the word "Hilary"(sic) you have a universal truth. She's just one example of the general case.
Two people I knew who had real hands on experience with politics at the local level, my grandfather who was president of an indy cab owners' trade organization in NYC and a man I worked for whose father had been an alderman in a medium sized Pennsylvania town, said the same thing, verbatim, about politicians--"They're all crooks." I haven't heard or read anything that's made me disagree.
I see I used "sic" incorrectly. The sentence I quoted spelled "Hillary" correctly. Sorry.
I just wish you had even a sliver of hope that it won't ALWAYS be like that.... That maybe at some point (not necessarily this election), a politician will come along that is different and does change how the political game is played.....
I have that hope - but I also have youth and lack of experience.... Maybe I'm silly for believing that things don't always have to stay the way they are now.... But, I'd rather have that hope than live my life without it.
Bobby Kennedy, pretty much considered a martyr, is a good example. His first job out of law school was working for Roy Cohn, best known for being Sen Joe McCarthy's lawyer. Remember, Kennedy was the son of one of the richest men in the country and undoubtedly had a choice of jobs. When he was attorney general he put a lot of effort into trying to put the brakes on the civil rights movement back when they were doing things like lunch counter sit-ins. J. Edgar Hoover didn't like him but nobody accused him of being "soft on communism." A lot of liberal Democrats thought he was more scary than many Republicans did. He moved to the left shortly after Eugene McCarthy demonstrated that being against the war in Viet Nam looked like a good thing to get in on.
Don't worry. I really am an optimist who doesn't believe in progress. IIRC I voted for Jimmie Carter. That's the last time. When I lived in his district I always voted for Ron Dellums although in his case the elections were more or less a formality. I'm one of about 5 people who don't think Jerry Brown wasn't a horrible governor. Dating Linda Ronstadt was a mistake but other than that...
I wish my hope was contagious.... I would cough it all over you, Nippy.
I'm a little confused about the following statement re Clinton:
"Imagine living in such an imaginary world that the thought of loosing the election and not being able to impose all those really cool laws Bush has written in over the last five years. "
Does Clinton salivate over the chance to enforce Bushlaw? What's the deal here? Sounds like something the mainstream media has ignored.
Well ... she's intelligent, I have to agree with that ...
She's real ... I haven't seen any arms up her back or strings from her shoulders ...
And she's caring ... she cares about one thing ... What is best for Hillary.
While it would be a sign of progress that a majority of Americans come to believe a woman could effectively serve as president, I don't believe a woman should be voted in on that criterion alone. The Glass Slipper mentality is for fairy tales, not real life; let's not vote her in simply because the pantsuit fits.
I'd love nothing more than for Hillary Clinton to disappear into obscurity. Well, OK… perhaps I would also like to get the Clintons off the American public's payroll. (But I'd settle for obscurity.)
I'd rather have someone like Clinton than an empty vessel like Reagan or either Bush.
I think what M C is referring to is that 43 passed a bunch of laws that expanded the powers of the Presidency. Hillary, or any other candidate for that matter, might just be salivating to get their hands on the expanded powers.
What any candidate might do if they reach the Oval Office is hard to tell. Most of the Dems (and Ron Paul) have all promised they would use the office's powers to turn back 43's advancements and shrink government's incursions on the regular folks.
But of course no one is safe from the awesome power of the one ring; not even the Hobbits.
To effectively get people to do what you want them to do is a part of the job, but if a leader is misguided about what actually should be done, we're screwed. George Bush was effective in getting us to go to war, but I think most people could now agree that it wasn't something we should have done (even though Hillary backed it). Hillary is solely focused on being everything and anything to get elected, using any means possible--including some manufactured "emotion"--to get there. To me, she is completely void of authentic substance; she is the empty vessel.
What we get to choose from is a bunch of people who are concerned only with being elected. I'm not fond of Clinton but she's no worse than the rest in that respect. Reagan and the Bushes were empty vessels because they were tools of their backers and never did anything they weren't told to. People like Clinton hope to use their backers. Big difference. At least she wouldn't be a ventriloquist's dummy. Obviously there are risks. :)
Hey Sue, how do you know that Hillary never shed any tears over Bill's philandering. Were you under the bed?
And LadyNalita, what does crying have to do with "sound judgment and wisdom"? There have been many strong leaders that shed tears. As a minister and spiritual counselor, I encourage people to release their stress and sadness through tears. We as a society encourage people to suppress their emotions and that is unhealthy.
I'm voting for Edwards, but l think that Hillary's being misjudged in this case.
But HRC is on the upswing. If she knows what's good for her, HRC and WJC will campaign like heck in the next few months. Chelsea, too.
And as far as intentions, all the candidates have intentions. It's up to us to figure out which candidate's intentions we like and decide if they have the ability to get it done.
As a woman, I'd hate to see our gender set back 200 years, which is what will happen if the *wrong* woman gets elected as the first female president.
Carla--I read Sue B's comment with an implied qualifier: "If she didn't show any *public* emotion when her philandering husband made a fool of her..." I agree with your comments regarding the healthy aspect of releasing one's stress, sadness, etc, through tears. However, I'm guessing you don't counsel people to release those tears publicly or while on the job. Campaigning for president is being on the job and having a news camera in your face is as public as it gets. There's a time and place for everything. While some things in life, like 9/11 or losing a loved one, might cause us to break no matter where we are, a buildup of stress, fatigue and the like allow us to choose a time to cry (or do whatever helps relieve those feelings). Political figures are well-tuned to the image they project every minute they are visible to the public eye. It is completely out of character for Hillary Clinton to "get emotional" with her voice cracking, etc. Completely 100% out of character. Through her long public history, through all the stress, the inquests, the nasty comments about Chelsea, through 9/11, through the discussions of war and lost American lives--no public tears, no cracking voice has ever been seen or heard. It shouldn't be a surprise, then, that people find this to be a manipulation. If not obvious on the surface, the conclusion can be reached by logical deduction.
"Nippy...my idea of a "good" candidate would be someone who is genuinely passionate about things that would serve the American people well."
And just how the hell would you be able to judge that candidate's "genuine passion"? What makes any of you above believe you can know any candidate's true inner self? You sound like 43 claiming he looked into Putin's soul. Gimme a break!!!
That being said, while one might not be able to judge, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that anyone has true, genuine passion, I think it's much easier to see the obvious, clear cut shyster in the bunch. Even without a crystal ball or a lie detector. (Although her history does help to distinguish.)