Yesterday, in The New York Times, the esteemed Maureen Dowd penned a clever little article about how Hillary’s hanging on has been good for Barack. I actually enjoy her work, but felt that this piece required some kind of response. Read as much of her article as you like at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/02/opinion/02dowd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Here’s what your uncle thinks:
There’s a lot of truth to it. Surviving everything that the Clintons have thrown at him (kitchen sink strategy) has probably made Obama tougher for it. But, I can only agree with the piece up to a point. First, Ahmadinejad is a big-mouthed figurehead, with limited credibility and clout. The corporate media has made him out to being the second coming of Hitler, but there are plenty more intimidating characters than him. Having to stare down John McCain alone, is a tougher proposition than facing the man who denies – with a straight face – that there are any “homosexuals” in his country. The second thing is that when she says that “Hillary’s work is done when she is done” comes off – more than a little – like: Hillary does what she wants! Like it, or lump it! Not exactly constructive, or mature for that matter. And lastly, the whole piece sounds a little like it’s coming from someone who’s desperately hoping that lightning can strike . . . again . . . one more time, and their chosen candidate could still prevail.
I think Hillary’s value added has peaked, and from here on out we’re facing the law of diminishing return.
Thanks for the dance lessons, Hillary! We’ll take it from here. On to the ball!
Your Uncle Rave
P.S. Look for Hillary on the next season of “Dancing With The Stars”.
Recent Comments