08 January 2008

New Hampshire: Poor Hillary?

Was that a sympathy vote the Senator from New York received tonight? Did her tears and her wispy-voiced mewling of the day before win over people who somehow thought that now they had seen her true face? Did they decide that she'd been treated meanly and contemptuously by those who would throw her under the Obama bandwagon? Did some remember that they had maybe recently thought it a good idea to have a woman president? Did others buy into the notion that a United States Senator is somehow unequipped to become the President, and that being a President's wife is a better credential? What the hell is going on here? We cannot know until other states tell the rest of the story. So I fall back on what I said after Iowa, which was pretty much nothing. Except that below, I consign two of tonight's losers to nothingness.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Her "tears and her wispy-voiced mewling" prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that she lacks the strength of character to truly be a leader. My guess it was an act to gain sympathy and on the world stage, there is very little sympathy for the US. Is she going to break down in tears before Putin to get him to change his mind about something? Will she mewl the Chinese into a more favourable trade status? Will she try her pseudo-feminine wiles before Ahmadinajad?

Samuel Wilson said...

You may be interested to know that Keith Olbermann on MSNBC tonight named two Fox News pundits "Worst Persons in the World" for making basically the same suggestion. The main difference is that the Fox talkers took the scene as a legitimate sign of weakness. Because you take it to be insincere, you might be less "worse" in Olbermann's eyes.

Anonymous said...

"Frankly my dear (pundit), I don't give a damn." To paraphrase Rhett Butler. Just because Fox is a right-wing sound byte generator, doesn't mean their talking heads are 100% wrong all the time, just as Mr. Olbermann can't be 100% correct (politically or otherwise) all the time.