Clinton’s Blessing

All the pundits over at MSNBC are debating themselves about whether tonight is going to be about Obama declaring himself the nominee, or Clinton celebrating her own campaign and stealing his thunder.

But maybe they’re missing something. Clinton is going to be speaking at Baruch College. Here’s the school’s release about it.

New York, NY – June 3, 2008 – Presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) will address throngs of supporters at a celebration marking the close of the Democratic Party’s primary election season this evening at Baruch College’s Athletics and Recreation Center (ARC).

The event is scheduled to begin at 7 PM. The ARC will be closed to students and the general public at 3 PM, and the 24th Street entrance to the Newman Vertical Campus will be open for ticketed guests at 6 PM. Students, faculty, and staff should use the 25th Street entrance for classes and other events after 6 PM.

The Clinton campaign website indicates that tickets are no longer available for the speech. The major news channels are expected to provide live coverage of the event.

Senator Hillary Clinton’s campaign team chose Baruch College as the site of their primary election season finale.

They chose Baruch. I wonder why they chose Baruch over all the other places they could have held the address…

The word “baruch” is related to brucha, meaning a blessing in Hebrew. It’s also the equivalent of the Arabic and Swahili “barack.”

See where I’m going with this? Is Clinton going to give Obama her blessing tonight?

Updated, Three Hours Later

Yeah, maybe not.

Google Buzz Tags: , , , , , , , ,


Hillary ClintonThat’s what a former boss of mine used to call it, and he grew up there, in the teeming metropolis of Boiling Springs, so I’m sure he always meant it in a positive way. Well, maybe not.

I’ve got my own slight connections to that other commonwealth: my family lived in Philadelphia in the early 1960s, while my father was working as a civilian at a military hospital, so apparently Philly is (or at least was, at the time) more pleasant than Viet Nam, where he would have been otherwise. As I understand it, we moved back to Brooklyn (the source of all life) a few months before I was born, so while I’ve never lived in Pennsylvania, I did gestate there.

I also attempted to go to college down there, but those snooty snobs at the U of P wait-listed me, then turned me down. Hmph.

I’ve got a good friend who grew up in Pittsburgh, but he got out of there and lives in London now.

Does it seem like I’m in a position to speak objectively about Pennsylvania? Nah. Screw those people.

I won’t get into my thoughts about the results of yesterday’s primary, as it would obviously just be a big, drippy case of sour grapes. But I do want to comment on Clinton’s victory speech:

The Guardian referred to this speech as “defiant” and “passionate.” I guess I missed that. It seems to me the speech is incredibly clumsy. She’s not connecting with the audience, even though they’re clearly on her side. Their cheering seems to get in her way, and she never seems to be comfortable in deciding whether to continue speaking over them, recognize the cheering, or join in.

As the goat said upon finding out he couldn’t afford the lederhosen, “I bet they would have chafed, anyway.”

Google Buzz Tags: , , ,

Concord Monitor: Anyone But Mitt

Mitt Romney‘Tis the season, as the saying goes, for newspapers, particularly in Iowa and New Hampshire, to publish their endorsements in the current political races. This time around, the Des Moines Register endorsed McCain and Clinton, and the Boston Globe (which is pretty widely read up in New Hampshire) went for McCain and Obama.

In New Hampshire itself, it appears that just about every newspaper leans to the right, so they generally only give their endorsement on the Republican side. The Union Leader of Manchester declared McCain “the man to lead America.” The Concord Monitor chose to do something I’ve never seen before: rather than endorsing a candidate, they asked their readers not to vote for one of them. And that one is the former governor of the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, Willard Mitt Romney.

Romney’s been leading all the polls in New Hampshire since he announced his candidacy, and that was no surprise, given that a lot of people in NH commute down to Boston for their work. A generally conservative state like New Hampshire is bound to have an affinity for a Massachusetts Republican — especially one as pretty as Romney. But a poll in the Globe from a few days ago shows McCain closing the gap, coming within three percentage points of Romney. Do we see a trend here, kids?

So this Just Say No to Mitt editorial in the Monitor is just a thing of beauty, as far as I’m concerned. You should definitely click through and read the whole thing, but I’ll give you the first two paragraphs and the last two, just to wet your whistle.

Romney should not be the next president

If you were building a Republican presidential candidate from a kit, imagine what pieces you might use: an athletic build, ramrod posture, Reaganesque hair, a charismatic speaking style and a crisp dark suit. You’d add a beautiful wife and family, a wildly successful business career and just enough executive government experience. You’d pour in some old GOP bromides – spending cuts and lower taxes – plus some new positions for 2008: anti-immigrant rhetoric and a focus on faith.

Add it all up and you get Mitt Romney, a disquieting figure who sure looks like the next president and most surely must be stopped.


When New Hampshire partisans are asked to defend the state’s first-in-the-nation primary, we talk about our ability to see the candidates up close, ask tough questions and see through the baloney. If a candidate is a phony, we assure ourselves and the rest of the world, we’ll know it.

Mitt Romney is such a candidate. New Hampshire Republicans and independents must vote no.

I love it! Of course, it would be nice if they’d run a couple more editorials, one explaining that Giuliani is a lying sack of shit and the other pointing out that Huckabee is… well, he’s Huckabee. We already know Fred Thompson flashed before he even got into the pan, and Tancredo is gone, so what’s that leave us with? Ron Paul, who (sorry, interweb denizens) really doesn’t represent what the GOP has stood for since Reagan, and Duncan Hunter, who is such a hyper-Reaganite that even Reaganites find him comical.

I wonder — What if they held a Republican primary, and no one showed up?

Google Buzz Tags: , , , ,