View Single Post
Old March 24th, 2008, 02:06 PM   #3 (permalink)
LastLook
Bronze Member
 
LastLook's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
it was becoming increasingly clear that there would be no do-over and she looked for the first time as if she realized she had lost, in that typically defiant "I'll-drag-you-all-down-with-me" Clinton way.
This piece lost all credibility right there. It's full of emotionally-charged words and not-even-thinly-veiled bitterness, which actually smacks a bit of fear.

I find this last bit particularly striking:

Quote:
he needs to show he cares, and she needs to show that she can win. But shouldn't that be something for them to work out alone, without the future of the Democratic Party, of the U.S. government, and of the country itself at stake?
Since when did Clinton-haters become psycho-analysts? And moreover, since when did they begin to care so much about the so-called "unity" of the country? To imply that one woman has the power to rip apart not only a political party, but damn near tear apart a nation as well just by having the nerve not to give in when someone else decides she should, or puts her under pressure...well, if that's not a testament to her leadership and resolve, I really don't know what is.

(Hopefully I needn't point out the testament to the media's bent for hyperbole, as well).

As for the other article, politicians jump on bandwagons, it's how they survive. Most of them do whatever polls tell them to do, unfortunately. Politics is a lonely, empty business in the end.
__________________
"Orthodoxy means not thinking - not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." - George Orwell, 1984
LastLook is offline   Reply With Quote