Clinton Laughs, Obama Lags, and Giuliani Spurs a Split

Third party nominee from the Right? The 'right' thing to do is to file divorce due to irreconcilable difference so those single-issue votes can re-nominate Pat Robertson for Chief Decider and free the GOP to bring someone new to the big dance.

Sent by Ding | 3:00 PM | 10-3-2007

I can't help it -- I love Hillary! She's had so many strikes against her -- the insult from Monica et al, the edgy voice, she doesn't look like a super model -- she's like the kid who gets picked on at school who just keeps on trucking! Though she is sensitive, she lets it all roll off her, keeps powering through, succeeding and shining. This is causing an electric energy to collect around her, which is the energy of people's positive attention. After all she's taken in life, she deserves it! And she has a realistic perspective on how politics works -- her ideals are grounded in practicality. I don't know if I see this in any of the other democratic candidates. I think they raise good ideals, but how will they accomplish them, having to work with a bicameral Congress?

Sent by Irene | 3:03 PM | 10-3-2007

I think the reason Hillary keeps going forward, shining ahead despite setbacks, is because she really cares deep down about doing a good job. People who really care from that strong foundation just don't trumpet their own values. They care to think about negotiating the obstacles that stand in the way of enacting those values.

It's as though her theme lyrics could be, "I get knocked down, but I get up again," except she doesn't really get knocked down. She just keeps going forward. So, setbacks brush off of her forward momentum like glancing blows. Maybe this is why she laughts so much -- because she recognizes the foces against her, acknowledges them merrily with smiling eyes as she takes it all in stride.

Sent by Irene | 6:17 PM | 10-3-2007

I'm sorry, maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm SO tired of hearing about the presidential horse-race. You're side-stepping REAL issues currently going on in politics to talk about something that may not even have any reference next week. The election is over a year away and I'm tired of hearing every little bit of gossip over it.

The elections are fixed anyway. I've come to realize the media is the one that chooses our candidates by constantly favoring talking about one or two than the others. You won't allow third party candidates into the media and until that happens, the American people are just getting the same old stuff with different names and faces.

Please consider practicing some real journalism and bring us some political news we can use, not just the speculations. These days, I hear you come on, and just turn the dial or go back to listening to my podcasts of more substantial news.

Sent by Ted Paxton | 6:38 PM | 10-3-2007

The lyrics I commented on previously in my analysis of how those lyrics apply to Hillary's spirit are from the song "Tubthumping" by Chumbawumba.

Sent by Irene | 7:16 PM | 10-3-2007

I'm a female who's been involved in progressive politics since college, 20+ yrs. But cannot get myself behind Hilary.

The carpetbagging to NY senatehood, riding on husband's coattails, voting for the Iraq war, being a weathervane & playing it safe w/votes aka w/the majority, taking massive special interest money from large corporations..

Very calculating individual.

Secondly, the GOP will have a field day crucifying her. The mudslinging will be merciless if she's the nominee.
Dems will lose the WH guaranteed.

Sent by kendall | 6:46 AM | 10-4-2007

From my blog:

Re; Why Hillary's laugh didn't bother me, even
taken out of context!

Let's take for example the question: Is your health-care plan socialized medicine?"
Well, it poses a false choice(Sorry: That's getting to be a buzz word):
A) She can't say "Yes" because 1) anything "socialism" is red-meat lingo for the conservatives to frighten their base with, but more importantly
2) it isn't.
B) She can't say, "Absolutely not, Tim(or whoever it was)!
Big Pharma, Insurance and Big Business will ALL be at the table!" because 1) That scares the left and 2) The truth is probably more complex, in a gray area that needs to be explained in further depth not possible in the current debate format and Senator Clinton knows: "You Can't Do That On Television!"

What Chris Matthews and even some within her own campaign call her "cackle", is actually a natural and forgivable response.
Plus let's all remember: This whole thing's a trivial distraction AGAIN.

To recap, her laugh possibly reflected her desperation with the dumbing down of today's political discourse. And yes the same superficial coverage happened to Gore, Dean and Kerry.
How many people are still glad they voted against Gore and/or Kerry because they were "too wooden"?

Disclaimer: I shouldn't claim to psychoanalyze Hillary, but that's how I'd feel. So glad I'm not her.

Sent by Alexandra Ottaway | 10:41 AM | 10-4-2007

I think Alexandra raises some good points. Laughter is said to happen when people embrace a contradiction -- when seeming opposites unite! When Hillary is asked if her plan is socialized medicine, she laughs, because, in some ways, "Yes, it is!" and "No, it's not!" Since the truth is more complex, both of those opposite realities co-exist within it.

We usually grumble mentally to try to resolve contradictions, but when we give up and embrace letting them both be at once, it's joyful! Neurons firing can signal "yes" or "no," but when they're all free to fire at once, it feels great! Hillary also laughs because she sees the trap the question puts her in which she can: "Yes, avoid!" and "No, she can't avoid it!" Buddha was joyful about the way things are. He's often portrayed laughing.

Sent by Irene | 5:28 PM | 10-9-2007

How wonderful to see a Buddhist analysis!

Sent by Liz | 9:20 AM | 10-14-2007