With all the conflict occurring within the ranks of the Democratic party, I just needed to watch Clinton's speech. I was enormously curious on how exactly she would pull off what was expected of her; to bring the party into complete unity. I must admit though, after some of the things she has been saying recently and the whole sniper fire deal, I was more interested in, not only hearing her speak on Obama, but also trying to read her sincerity. Alright, that’s really the only reason I was going to watch the speech, but hey, due to my lack of a social life I have been watching a lot of politics lately, and after yesterday not really grabbing me I was a little sluggish to tune in to the DNC this afternoon, so back off.
I have to say though I was very impressed with her speech. It was a great speech, unless you take into account what people were expecting of her and what she was supposed to accomplish. Obama's name was only mentioned ten times and at extremely brief intervals during the speech and she seemed to be more focused upon herself and the Democratic party as a whole than the Illinois senator. The phrase, "I ran for president to...," happened to appear at least a couple times, which was immediately followed up with a list of what she would have accomplished in office. She did bring up Bush several times though, reminding the convention of all the things he has done wrong, you know; just in case they forgot. She continued to say that over the last eight years that the American people have been “invisible” to the government. It should be worth noting, if we were invisible for 8 years, congress has been ran by the democrats several of those years. Therefore, if you take that statement as truth than the Democrats are partially responsible for that. Indeed, according to congress’s approval ratings, Americans do think that the Democrats are part of the problem. What really shocked me though, about her speech, was when she was speaking about the war. She said that if the Democratic party got into office, they would bring the troops home with responsibly and with honor. This seems to contradict Obama's plan, and support a conditions based plan that even McCain and Bush could endorse.
Even her attacks on McCain were weak. She only really brought up John McCain when referring to our current President, and how McCain would be another four more year term for Bush politics. She instead, for the most part, said a lot of specific positive things about McCain, but not Barack Obama. McCain, she said, was a friend of hers and that she respected him and what he had done while serving his country. Yet she added that we don't need four more years of a republican in the White House. I feel her speech seemed more centered around getting the Republicans out and not so much getting Obama in. Even when she urged people to think of their children and vote for Obama, she was equating it more on a negative attack on the republicans and not a positive push for Obama. They may seem like one in the same, but to Hillary they are not. I feel there is a clear distinction between the two. If she came out declaring, "Obama is ready to lead because...," than I may have been convinced. Yet, as shown in McCain’s ads, she was saying the exact opposite during her campaign, so it would have been reasonable to assume that she would have refuted herself during her speech, if what was said in the primaries was merely a political ploy; especially if McCain is circulating an ad around showing her saying it. Biden did it and she should have as well, but refrained from defending Obama concerning the attacks by his opponents and critics. The media defends Obama more effectively on a daily basis than she did in her speech. I don't think it was because it was a crappy speech. Simply, she still isn’t 100% behind Obama.
Furthermore, we know she has a lot of backing amongst women voters, and she brought up women’s suffrage a lot, really emphasizing that women’s votes need to count. It could be a history thing, it being the 88th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment, or there could be something more to it. In the context of what she has said in the past and her speech at the DNC as a whole, I would say that it is a safe bet to assume that there may be something more behind the statements other than just a shout out to Susan B. Anthony.
Another thing I am curious about is the one charge against McCain she did make. She stated that McCain supported women making less money than men. I don't recall McCain saying anything like that and have been looking on Google for a quote or a piece of legislation that McCain may have passed encouraging this. I was unsuccessful, though just because I couldn't find it, doesn't mean she is lying, but it will keep her followers in the Democratic camp. They won’t question her statement, so I am a little suspicious of this charge. Overall, I enjoyed the speech, but I am pretty sure if I was in Obama's shoes I would be feeling something completely different.
No comments:
Post a Comment