Comments on: Hillary Clinton’s Hissy Problem . . .

By: cosmoetica

cosmoetica — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:34:30 +0000

Shaun: Be thankful Holly, Jill and Damozel didn't neuter you during their group hissy fit, because, after all, you started things by using the word, and they'll end it with the thing itself.

By: Jillmz

Jillmz — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 14:48:51 +0000

Thanks, Shaun – as I wrote in Holly's thread in response to this, I agree.
But I would also like to put in here for the record that at least in the Ohio blogs, if you say anything that remotely relates to Obama that doesn't reflect positively on him – even you are voting for him – you get slammed. Now, that's having a hissy too.

So – I will toss this off to my being a purist when it comes to narrative writing: tell me what it is you're observing – then I'll decide if I think it's hissy or not. I work with a group of second graders on writing a monthly journal for their class and you can't imagine (unless you have a second grader) how many times we have this conversation:

Me: “So – how was the “fill in the blank event”?

kid: “It was GREAT!”

ME: Ok – what was great about it?

Kid: It was FUN!”

Me: Ok- what was fun about it?

Kid: They were CRAZY!

Me: Ok – what was crazy about it?

kid: It was WILD!

Me: Ok – what was wild about it?

I do change my questions eventually – tell me what you saw or heard that made you think it was wild – were the people speaking really faster than a television commerical and throwing food around like a cafeteria food fight and making faces at you like they wanted to make you laugh and wearing clown clothes in all different colors?

By: shaun

shaun — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:11:49 +0000

Jillmz:

This belated comment is being cross-posted at Holly's brief and much commented on post regarding Clinton.

We would be reading more about "the way things are" if Clinton didn't try to change the rules or say they should be changed, among other things, when things don't go her way. The Michigan and Florida delegations, Nevada caucuses, Texas primary rules and superdelegate rules are but four examples. Additionally, she keeps trying to move the goalposts, the latest instance being the most ridiculous. In this context my comparison to my childhood friend Kathy is most apt.

By: Jillmz

Jillmz — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:32:01 +0000

DLS do you read Matt Bai at all? He wrote me a year or two ago, in response to something I asked him, that identity politics doesn't really exist. Just saying. lol For some people it does, for others, it doesn't. In the U.S. today, that some do some don't seems to say it all. It's why we are work so hard to keep up a democracy in which the losing party and candidate and voters don't stampede. No one said that doing so was easy.

By: cosmoetica

cosmoetica — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:35:30 +0000

Shaun: I have it on good authority that this post as driven Holly Robinson foaming to the madhouse. Shame on you!

By: DLS

DLS — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:27:00 +0000

“some people really prefer her – in fact a lot of people do”

That includes my rad-lib friend in DC (self-admitted); identity politics (reverse racism and sexism) on the Left is the big theme underpinning the Choice the normal Dem voters face this year. When there's an eventual winner and loser, a lot of people (those who lose the contest along with the candidate) will be sad. Not that they'll stampede to vote GOP in retaliation, you understand! (I'm sure you do)

By: DLS

DLS — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:24:46 +0000

Bush didn't have a mandate in 2004 and the Dems and their supporters have even less of a claim to that in 2006 (which was not pro-Dem but anti-GOP). In this year's election, even, while some find Obama appealing (and the childish and naive have made him their messiah already, casting reality as well as their inhibitions or questions aside — how often have we heard that Baby Boomer being called a post-Boomer, for example?), it's also a tiresome reaction continued from the 2006 elections, tired of a dysfunctional GOP as well as disappointed or disgraced by Bush. (I leave the true hatred and the cheap shots at Bush and at others to the pathological people and the failures in our society.)

By: Jillmz

Jillmz — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:17:39 +0000

Shaun – let me ask you this sincerely – why do you think that we're rarely reading stories that highlight how this struggle for the nomination represents the way things are: that is, some people really prefer her – in fact a lot of people do. And some people really prefer him, in fact a lot of people do

I don't mean to be overly simplistic, but let me try it this way: I remember after Bush won in 2004, people were calling it a “mandate” and using other words that would convey the idea that Americans were incredibly united behind him and voted for him overwhelmingly – I think that that word was even used.

But the fact is, he garnered just over 50% of the popular vote. That is not a “mandate.” And yet many in the media went on to talk about his win as though Americans spoke in a singular voice when voting.

Do you see what I mean?

By: distributorcap

distributorcap — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:29:39 +0000

you gotta love this latest spin from Mark Penn— can you please tell me – WHO IS BUYING IT?

it is Penn and Wolfson's Laugh In !