The Politico begins with a soliloquy. What does Hillary want? “Senator Hillary Clinton asked the question herself on the night of the last primaries in early June … Mr. Obama has given Mrs. Clinton a speaking role on the Tuesday night of the convention.” Somehow I think she wants a little more than that; and the Politico thinks so too.
“But she made it clear in a recent chat with supporters — which is now on YouTube — that she is steeped in negotiations over how to salve the wounds of her disappointed supporters so that they don’t stray in November. She suggested she may allow her name to be placed in nomination, and also that her supporters don’t need her permission to do that on their own.”
For the first time in months, the traded price for the proposition that Hillary Clinton will be the next Democratic Party nominee rose in the Intrade prediction markets; nearly doubling from a rock bottom of 2.5% to nearly 5%. What’s going on? In the video “a woman asks Mrs. Clinton what happens if her name is placed in nomination at the convention and she actually wins. ‘That’s not going to happen,’ Mrs. Clinton replies. ‘What we want to have happen is for Senator Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats’”
My translation? Hillary regards the result of the primary process as merely indicative. Real legitimacy is going to be conferred in Denver. ‘Of course’ Obama is going to win; but he doesn’t, then however she may regret it, there will be no avoiding the fact, quivering like newly gutted fish in the sink, that she will be the official standard bearer. Can you see any other interpretation?
she seems to give a green light to her supporters to go ahead and make whatever mischief they might: “I’ve made it very clear that I’m supporting Senator Obama and we’re working cooperatively on a lot of different matters,” she says. “But delegates can decide to do this on their own, they don’t need permission.” Still, she concludes, “it would be better if we had a plan and we put it in place and executed it.”
Is that a threat or is it a promise?
Tip Jar.
So the primaries were a tale, told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The dems are looking mighty Shakespearian.
I would still support Hillary….
I hope SOMETHING happens, comes out, gets printed that forces BO, the Messiah to withdraw from the race……….
I’m a Hillary supporter. At this point, however, I can’t believe she is interested in “making mischief”. I really don’t understand the widespread assumption on the Right that she is so totally ruthless that she could pretend to support BO for all she’s worth, but at the same time be stabbing him in the back.
Dark corners and daggers…this is shaping up into one fun convention.
jj mollo…you were making a funny, right?
It’s not that Hillary is totally ruthless, or that’s not the point. The point is that Obama has lost ground since sewing up the nomination. He has made a series of errors, serious enough to call into question his judgment and ability to carry the general in November. The Democrats can’t lose this one, and it looks like they might.
I don’t think daggers will be the weapon of choice. I’d look for bludgeons.
Derek
The Dems’ own Night of the Long Knives is slowly coming together. This could be very messy. Might have to free up some hard disk space on the recorder.
What is this bottle of RidAnt doing in the kitchen? … Oh, look, a butterfly!
If you as a group don’t think that HRC will glom onto the nomination by any means available, as long as she can have provably clean hands, you are asleep… or dreaming.
The Obamessiah has made mis-steps and his share of flubs. Perhaps more than his share. His followers are ignoring his dance and his song because he’s “THE ONE”, no matter what he says and does. HRC only has to wait for the supes to realize he’s a charlatan ‘music man’, wearing no clothes. (what a mixed bunch of metaphor that one is…)
tom
“Fire burn And cauldron bubble!”
We ain’t seen nothing yet.
Bill Clinton’s remark, i.e.,”I think everybody’s got a right to run for President who qualifies under the Constitution,” is hitting Sen. Obama in a potentially vulnerable, fatal area.
The Texas Darlin’ web site, nominally a Hillary support site, is calling Sen. Obama’s certificate of live birth a forgery and invoking security analysis of the document. Others are hitting back, hard. Something is rotten in Denmark. All Sen. Obama has to do is produce a real birth certificate, but he won’t do it.
Macbeth is a play of blood. If Hillary attacks, the political blood will flow. Is Hillary mulling over the pros and cons, a la MacBeth in his soliloquy?
“If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
It were done quickly. If th’ assassination
Could trammel up the consequence, and catch,
With his surcease, success; that but this blow
Might be the be-all and the end-all — here,
But here, upon this bank and shoal of time,
We’d jump the life to come. But in these cases
We still have judgment here; that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
To plague th’ inventor: this even-handed justice
Commends th’ ingredients of our poison’d chalice
To our own lips. He’s here in double trust:
First, as I am his kinsman and his subject,
Strong both against the deed; then, as his host,
Who should against his murderer shut the door,
Not bear the knife myself. . . . I have no spur
To prick the sides of my intent, but only
Vaulting ambition, which o’erleaps itself
And falls on th’ other — ”
Act 1, Scene 7
“I really don’t understand the widespread assumption on the Right that she is so totally ruthless that she could pretend to support BO for all she’s worth, but at the same time be stabbing him in the back.” Boy, and I thought the Obambi folks were a bunch of Kool-aid drinkers. Step away from the punch bowl, JJ. Us right-wing nutjobs have Hillary’s history to point to as proof of her ruthless nature. FBI files, the ransacking of Vince Foster’s office after his “suicide”, the Travel Office fiasco, etc. etc. all have her fingerprints about over them, not to mention the ruthless manner in which Mr. Clinton’s serial bimbo eruptions were handled. She is Lady MacBeth to the teeth. She will play the part of Henry II, exclaiming “”What sluggards, what cowards have I brought into my inner circle, who care nothing about allegiance or loaylity. Will no one rid me of this meddlesome politician?” And then claim innonence when the long knives come out for Obama.
Mark –
“Macbeth is a play of blood”
No. Macbeth is a bloody play; but, it is not a play of blood. I am also not sure the soliloquy, eloquent though it is, is apt for your point. Macbeth was grappling with the fact that he is plotting on killing King Duncan who: a. just rewarded him, b. was kin, c. was soon to be a guest in his home.
Hillary owes Obama no such consideration.
Indeed, if Obama were to win, while being a Senator is nice for some, her ambitions are higher. Certainly her and her husband’s clout would diminish: no more multi-million dollar donations to the Clinton library if that influence goes away.
All Sen. Obama has to do is produce a real birth certificate, but he won’t do it.
I’ve been wondering about this. Doesn’t somebody in the government have to vet people who run for President? The Secret Service maybe? I mean, the Constitution (whatever it’s worth these days) still clearly says you have to be born in the USA. So I would think that somebody, somewhere actually checks. Do you fill out some kind of application to run for President? Or can I just start running myself tomorrow?
As for the Big O, it wouldn’t surprise me AT ALL if his white-hating, West-hating mamma went out of her way to make sure her Little Man was NOT a US citizen. For her, it would have the juicy frisson of rebellion. Lefties always love empty gestures of defiance.
(Sarcasm ON) The BC thing is just stupid, his mom was a US citizen, he was born on US soil, he pays taxes and was eligible for Social Security (US Senate membership may have changed that), I think that makes him a citizen, (Sarcasm OFF).
“I really don’t understand the widespread assumption on the Right that she is so totally ruthless that she could pretend to support BO for all she’s worth, but at the same time be stabbing him in the back.”
It seems the democrat thing to do! The list of samples it too long to reproduce here.
Waseusaf wrote:
“The BC thing is just stupid, his mom was a US citizen, he was born on US soil, he pays taxes and was eligible for Social Security (US Senate membership may have changed that), I think that makes him a citizen. . .”
Actually, while he may be a citizen, there could conceivably be complications regarding his eligibility for the presidency, which requires, if I’ve got this straight, that a candidate by born in the US or to American citizens. If Sen. Obama was not born in the US, and did not have two US citizens as parents, he may be a citizen, but, apparently, would not meet the criteria for the presidency.
All he has to do, of course, is produce the birth certificate that he says, in his book, that he found among the family papers. Not a big deal. Just produce it. Or a copy of the Hawaii birth certificate (as opposed to the certificate of live birth). No big deal. . . .
A New Hampshire man brought suit against McCain re. proof of birth in the US etc. McCain produced his certificate willingly. No big deal.
“I really don’t understand the widespread assumption on the Right that she is so totally ruthless that she could pretend to support BO for all she’s worth, but at the same time be stabbing him in the back.”
Well, if you’re going to stab someone in the back, that’s how you do it. If you come at him with knife raised yelling “I’M GONNA STAB YOU IN THE BACK SUCKA!” he doesn’t turn his back on you.
Instruments of darkness tell us truths
Win us with honest trifles
To betray us in deepest consequence.
I did not mean to imply that Hillary would challenge Sen. Obama’s claim that he was born in Hawaii. I assume that he indeed was born there. But might there might be some challenge, if young Barack had been adopted by his Indonesian father (which would require Muslim status in Indonesia) and subsequently resided in Indonesia for four years, regarding whether Barack met the criterion re. a ‘natural born’ citizen.
Sen. Obama’s web site leaves out any mention of marriage to an Indonesian: “Barack’s father eventually returned to Kenya, and Barack grew up with his mother in Hawaii, and for a few years in Indonesia.” How that for elipsis? Is it possible the Senator holds dual citizenship? I don’t know, but I suspect both the Clinton and McCain camps have inquiring minds that want to know.
I copied the cases below from Wikipedia to indicate some of the complexities surrounding the definition of “natural born:–
Montana v. Kennedy, 366 U.S. 308 (1961): A person born in 1906, whose mother was a native-born citizen of the United States and whose father was a foreign citizen, who was born overseas and then moved to the United States, was not a citizen of the United States by birth. (Note that the relevant laws have changed considerably since 1906, so this decision does not necessarily apply to later cases.)
Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964): The Court voided a statute that provided that a naturalized citizen should lose his United States citizenship if, following naturalization, he resided continuously for three years in his former homeland. “We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native-born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the ‘natural born’ citizen is eligible to be President.”
I think it’s worth remembering that the Clintons are not the only ones with long knives in this one. BHO looks to me to be a product of the Soros-led, left-wing takeover of the Democratic party, a bloodless coup in which power was wrested from the more centrist New Dem Clintonistas. (Is it naive to think of Ned Lamont as a dry run for the Barry show?)
I don’t see the Lefties rolling over here. They know more than we do and, either they know we’re wrong in our speculation or they will bring out whatever big guns they can. This is their only shot, and they know it. The antiwar fervor is already ebbing, and Americans are proving that they’ll need to be tricked into going socialist, which Obama was teetering on the edge of accomplishing for awhile.
Shakespearian indeed.
Go, Hillary, Go.
I’m not a Hillary supporter, and could not conceive of being one since I thought she should have beheaded Bill back then, and don’t understand what kind of soul could continue in a marriage like that.
But, damn – Obama scares me *so* much now that if McCain can’t pull it off, then at least I’m pretty sure that Hillary wouldn’t sell the country to Saudi Arabia which I think B. Hussein would have no trouble doing.
I can’t believe that Condoleeza Rice thinks Obama would make an okey-dokey President person. State has totally vacuumed her brains out and she’s now a mellanin-enhanced zombie. At least Hillary is still walking and not shambling and I haven’t detected any hair growing on her palms.
Plus I think it would be way-fun to watch Hillary and Michelle in a hair-pulling contest at the Convention (if Obama wants to get involved, he can go up against Bubba). I wonder if Michelle does that neck-jerk, hand-slap thing when she fights like so many black ladies seem to be doing these days.
Seems NahnCee has fallen for the media’s spin on Condi’s remarks about Obambi. — “Oh, the United States will be fine,” said U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice when asked whether she’d feel secure with a President Obama in the White House.– She basically said that the US would survive a Obama Presidency, not that he would be an “okey-dokey President”. Not how the media spun it of course. She went on to endorse Senator McCain, ” Sen. McCain is a fine patriot, and … he would be a great president.” She remains the Democrats’ worse nightmare. IMHO, if McCain were to pick her as his VP. Makes Obambi’s lack of experience, accomplishments, etc. stand out in sharp-relief. How do you run against the granddaughter of an Alabama sharecropper who by the force of her intellect and talent has risen to the highest levels of the federal government. Yes, she says she doesn’t want the job, but she is a die-hard football fanatic and she could be doing the pump-fake. I for one hope McCain goes for the Hail-Mary pass on the VP selection. Colin Powell would be another one.
I don’t see the Democrats taking it from Sen. Obama because African Americans will leave the Party — not just stay home but vote for Sen. McCain. Also, they would look like disorganized rabble at their convention and who would want them running the country? In which case they lose the Presidency and perhaps the Congress as well. I think it would require Hillary to take 80 percent of the White Female vote to win, since black females won’t be voting for her. I don’t see it.
No. I think Hillary wants Barack to lose in November and lose big (put him out of the running for 2012) even while she campaigns for him (and her voters vote for McCain). Then she has a clear shot at 2012.
Obama has to deal. If he wins, she gets a Supreme Court nomination. If he loses, he pledges support for her run in 2012. That’s for the minimum cooperation at the convention and during the campaign. He will have to give her something along those lines or watch the Clintons put a hole in his hull.
There is just no way these two egos could co-habit Airforce One.
To several posters here: yes, Hillary is completely ruthless; it is a mark of a good statesman.
Can she swing it, though? There is the rub. If she deposed the Ubermessiah, there would be 16 year old girls throwing themselves under busses; mushy prime-tinme for the Democrat conference. Therefore, “If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
It were done quickly.”
Tarnsman @4.59
I would luuuuuve to see Condi as VEEP; and probably she would become the next President. That would be a dream.
Some right people think she is unnacceptable, but she is at least not a stupid, vacuopus sap. She is her own man and knows the ropes of Washington and the world.
Maybe she could have Collin Powell as VEEP!’
(Also not ideal but at least not socialist)
god, if we have to have a black person in the white house, can’t it be denzel?
But “Condi” is no better at being Secretary of State than Janet Reno, just better looking.
Why do you need a gimmick, whether that be because someone is black or female.
Can we get out of this symbolism bullshit and deal with the essence of these people’s records for chrissakes?
Bob, Bob. Janet Reno was AG not SoS.
Denzel for Prez.
Paris for VP.
Oops. Quite right.:)
But the symbolism schtick is still dreamworld stuff.
Hillary sounds like Tony Soprano talking to Ralphie C. about the Jackie Jr. problem.
You go, baby. It’s just business…