Book Nook provides readers with insights into the world of books. Vick Mickunas takes you into the center of the publishing world with the latest book buzz, book reviews, and exclusive chats with authors..Home > Blogs > Book Nook > Archives > 2008 > August > 26 > Entry
Bill and Hill are sharpening their blades
Are you ready for the big performance? Hillary Clinton will address the Democratic National Convention tonight in Denver. Tomorrow, Bill Clinton will get his shot at the big stage.
Get ready for a deadly amusing pair of speeches. This will be quite the act. The Clintons must pretend that they wish Barack Obama well. Don’t believe it for a moment. Hillary is more likely to appear sincere. Bill will play the ruddy buddy. Don’t look now, are those knives concealed behind their backs?
They want Obama to lose. If he fails to defeat John McCain then you can expect the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign to slip into high gear the very day after the election.
It’s Obama’s election to lose. All those disgruntled Hillaryites who plan to vote for McCain will be pressing their sour grapes into some very bitter whine. I mean wine.
The Democrats should not have to worry about losing this election, right? Do you remember Jimmy Carter? He couldn’t get re-elected in 1980. But four years before he rode the wave of Nixonian disgust right into the White House. Watergate was a second rate burglary that cost the Republicans big time. The Nixon landslide victory of 1972 was swept away by that tsunami of White House corruption and lies.
George W. Bush is deeply unpopular. We are stuck in another quagmire overseas. The economy is circling the drain. Two terms under George W. Bush has meant billions of dollars in deficits with no end in sight.
So, how can the Democrats possibly squander their chance to take back the White House? Just ask Hillary. That gleam in her eyes is the reflection of those sharpened blades and the intent to exact a pitiless revenge upon Barack Obama.
These are strange days. Watch the Clintons as they speak. Those gleams in their eyes are not the lustre of good will or forgiveness.
A bright shining malice glows with avarice and deceit. Beware Barack Obama, your assailants are closer than you realize…
Vick Mickunas
Permalink | Comments (21) | Post your comment | Categories: politicked
Comments
By prose
August 29, 2008 10:45 PM | Link to this
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate, the optimism of a Cubs fan or the arrogance of a once suffering Bosox supporter.By victor mickunas
August 29, 2008 8:01 PM | Link to this
McCain’s chances of winning the White House seem slightly better than the odds that the Chicago Cubs can end a century of frustration. But who knows? Life is funny. Cubs fans know that…By prose
August 29, 2008 6:45 PM | Link to this
Poor Victor. Obama gives the best convention speech, and perhaps one of the greatest political speeches in our lifetime and you’re still negatively fixated on the Clinton’s. If they’d been shown on camera you’d have complained about how they were stealing face time from Barack. If they’d been interviewed you’d have accused them of reneging on their endorsment. If they would have been mentioned (actually they were, gratefully acknowledged and praised from the podium by our candidate..Mr.Obama) you’d have sniped about them robbing Barack of the spotlight. You clearly can’t accept the fact that our party appreciates the service of both Clinton’s, and rightfully so. Thankfully, Obama believes this too, or are you calling him a deceitful sham and a liar? Come on Vick, you can’t have it both ways. Is Obama a liar and just being a cheap, underhanded, politically expedient snake oil salesperson in his praise of the Clinton’s? Is he a deceptive young opportunist, mimicking the Clinton-style, hard hitting rhetoric, displaying the same tired old politics he claims to abhor? I don’t think so. Your viewpoints are abysmally wrong headed about the Clinton’s. I wish you’d please stop harming our candidate, Mr. Obama, by insinuating he’s a charlatan, a fake and a fraud. You’re also wrong about McCain’s choice of Palin. Strategic master stroke? She’s younger than Obama, way less experienced and a political featherweight from the most politically corrupt state that’s not named New Jersey. How does he attack Obama about the age, experience and judgement issues now? It’s just more pandering and clear evidence that he’s gone daft. About the only thing I’ve ever agreed with Bush on is his opinion that McCain has neither the temperament nor the judgement to be president. But, to you he’s a master political strategist?! Please go back to reviewing books, pal. Blowfly is painfully accurate with his Quayle analogy. On the other hand your political sense is nonsense. And, your Clinton bashing is as old, tired and delusional as McCain.By Blowfly
August 29, 2008 5:35 PM | Link to this
Reading the debate between Pete and Vic makes me all misty-eyed for home. I can just imagine it taking place at The Greenwood or over a game of Diplomacy. As for McCain - I think he has a screw loose. Unless, Palen is a lesbian I can’t see any of Hillary’s gal pals voting for a pro-life arch-conservative, with essentially no political experience; not to mention that the bulk of Hilary’s support is concentrated in large traditionally democratic states that the republicans have no chance of winning. What McCain is really getting is a female Dan Quayle (if he’s lucky). Can you imagine what Biden will do to this poor women in the VP debate? I can’t believe that this was McCain’s best option. She’s not remotely qualified for the job, and certainly not to be president. He might as well of just picked Paris Hilton. It’s just another sign of his terrible judgment … bomb-bomb Iran, 100 years of war, I don’t know how many houses I have. Do you want him answering the phone at 3am? If we are lucky he’s a sound sleeper and the call will go to voice mail. Arhg!By victor mickunas
August 29, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this
John McCain has made a cagey choice for his VP, Governor Palin of Alaska, a woman! This will be the true test of the loyalty of the Hilaryites to Barack Obama. A woman! What a master stroke of strategy by the Repubs….By victor mickunas
August 29, 2008 12:05 AM | Link to this
My top speeches from the DNC: John Kerry gets an A+. Why couldn’t he speak like that when he ran? Al Gore gets a B+. Why couldn’t he speak like that when he ran? Barack Obama gets an A+. Why couldn’t he…wait…he is running! Wow, what a concept! (I know, I didn’t include either Clinton speech. Did you see them tonight for Obama’s big night at the stadium? Me neither. The Clintons got their ratings reduced for being no-shows for Obama’s big moment. Can you believe they skipped out on that? What a shock!)By prose
August 28, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this
Can barely stop laughing….so Bill gets a B because he’s a great speech maker anyway, and Obama gets a B+ because he’s cute!? Gee…that kool-aid you drank must be like crack. Please seek help, Vick. Do you dream about and lust for him too? Unrequited love must be so difficult. What do groupies do these days? Hang around the tour bus hoping for an invite in like the old days?By victor mickunas
August 27, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this
Scoring the speeches tonight: John Kerry-if he had ever had fire like this when he ran for president he would have won A+…Bill Clinton-always had a silver tongue…he could roll out of bed and speechify like no other…he said some of the things that Hillary neglected to say last night B….Beau Biden- a very touching intro for his father Joe Biden…a real tear-jerker and heartstring puller A….Joe Biden - seemed a little lost…he waited a long time to be the bridesmaid…a few good points but he’s no John Kerry C….Barack Obama - really didn’t give a speech tonight but he scored points for being so cute B+. Bill and Hill watched it all like cats peering into the bird’s cage. They weren’t licking their lips but they sure looked famished.By prose
August 27, 2008 9:39 PM | Link to this
Those nasty knife wielding Clinton’s sure did a number on Obama tonight. Poor Michelle looked nervous, and the delegates appear ready to bolt the party. As for your abilities as a politcal analyst and prognosticator Vick, I humbly suggest you stick to interviews and book reviews.By TRS
August 27, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this
Perhaps the best analysis I heard - if Senator Obama wins the election, the Clintons will no longer be the powers that be in the Democratic party. If he loses, Hillary is teed up as the presumptive nominee for 2012. If you believe the Clintons are OK with fading into the sunset, then her speech was sincere. If not, then tepid may be the right word.By Page Turner
August 27, 2008 5:11 PM | Link to this
On the contrary, Vick, those “poll” respondents on AOL aren’t necessarily voters. They are merely people who happened to log onto AOL today. They may not even be Americans! Secondly, the “poll” is appended to an article by a writer who acknowledges that he’s “not the best judge of how it went down” since he finds “it really hard to understand why anyone would have supported Clinton over Obama.” Perhaps that applies to you, too?By Mark Gisleson
August 27, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this
Hillary did better than Teddy did in ‘80. I was happy with her speech, if a bit blown away by the narcissism of the lead in and build up. But once she cut loose it was a very good speech. Almost as good as Michelle Obama’s. Given that Clinton deliberately drove deep wedges into the party (her words will be quoted by McCain nonstop until the election), she made partial amends last night. Clinton ran a dirty campaign that isn’t done hurting Obama. The inflated HRC ego on display last night was inevitable given that she’ll never apologize for having crossed the line and spoken ill of a fellow Dem last spring. But she closed the door on the PUMAs, and that’s a good thing.By victor mickunas
August 27, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
AOL is polling their members today. They posed this question: “Was Hillary Clinton’s speech too tepid? Over 65,000+ responses so far and 33% said YES. I’m not alone in my opinion…that’s over 20,000 AOL members who thought her speech was too tepid. These are not pundits or pols responding to that question-they are voters.By victor mickunas
August 27, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this
Prose, methinks thou doth protest too much. Mind reading? I thought that Michelle Obama looked nervous during Hillary’s speech. I’m sure there were many things that could have been making her nervous? You are claiming that I am trying to read her mind and then saying what I’m supposedly thinking? Let me make your task simpler; if Hillary bailed on Bill she probably would be the nominee right now. He cost her that in my view. Did you notice the glaring omission in her speech? She thanked Chelsea. She didn’t thank Bill. How obvious does that have to be? In regard to Biden. I think Hillary would have been far superior to Biden as a running mate for Obama. Biden is the ultimate inside the beltway player and in my view he adds nothing to the ticket. Zilch. OK, they might win Delaware. I think Biden’s slams on Obama when Biden was still running for the nomination were just as bad as some of the things Hillary flung at Obama. I think you could probably walk down any street in America and find a better running mate for Obama than Biden. Your assertion that my views on Hillary are sexist is simply untrue. If she dumped that bozo spouse of hers I would be in her camp. She would have earned my respect. She made her bed and she continues to sleep in it. Her husband’s sexual peccadilloes are one thing, his financial chicanery since leaving office is another. So, thanks for reading my mind. I’m always happy to share what I really think.By prose
August 27, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this
One more thing….these blade and sharpened knive analogies are disconcerting. I hope you’re not harboring some dark thoughts about seeking redress from the Clinton’s that would cross the line. Please, old buddy, seek help with this obsession before it consumes you. It’s unlike you to fixate so completely on the loser of a nomination battle.By prose
August 27, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this
If there is a cult in this nutty election cycle, it’s with Obama messiah complex guys like you. You seem to take any criticism of him as treason. Clinton went on endlessly with her praise of, and pounding in the need for electing, Obama. I again ask, what will ever be enough for you? You claim it was just the Hillaryites cheering? Yeah..those miscreants hiding behind counterfeit unity and Obama buttons must have been secreted in by the evil Hillary. Now, you’re claiming to read the body language and mind of Michelle as sharing your fears? Whoa..instead of making Freudian interpretations of others, I suggest sweeping your side of the street. You’re now beyond a mind reading empath, evidently you’re ready to claim that all these people, including the Obama camp were just playing to the cameras. Gee, that’s the kind of “change” we were all “hope..ing” for isn’t it? You either didn’t watch this speech or Clinton must have all the delegates there, because anyone who did watch and says only her delegates were cheering is being disengenuous to the extreme. Pundits from the BBC to the domestic networks all lavished praise on her efforts to convince her recalcitrant supporters to get on board with Obama. As I asked before, what is contrition to you? Did Hillary stiff you on an interview like Michael Moore and make your eternal enemies list? Face it, you are obsessed with your dislike and intense hatred for her and the former president. I’m beginning to think it could also be a gender issue. Biden criticized Obama with similar questions. Why does he get a pass? Or any of the others who ran against him in the primary race? Obama has to endure the Clinton’s presence at the convention? Guess ANY person who ran against the annointed one should cower and hide. Doesn’t that statement reveal YOUR state of mind? Where would you have them be? We have hard fought election cycles in this country. You seem to want some form of coronation. You keep trying to make Clinton the central issue of the campaign. If you had your way, hiding out in a foreign land until after the election wouldn’t be enough. Which again leads me to ask, what IS enough for you? The Obama campaign was delighted. He and Michelle were delighted. Or are they just lying to all of us? Are these new agents of change just lying? Were all the hugs and handshakes blarney? It would seem by your comments you have a special insight to the thoughts and intentions of everyone involved. And, the incredible ability to divine other peoples motivations, intentions and thoughts through the television monitor. You’re sorely needed at the State Department and CIA. Put it to good use and get to work helping Obama, not McCain.By victor mickunas
August 27, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this
The “wild cheering” you describe was merely the Hillaryite cult of personality responding in worshipful fashion. Michelle Obama looked nervous during Hill’s speech, afraid of what might come out Hillary’s mouth next. HRC can be warm and charming but we didn’t see any of that side of her during the speech. Why not? Of course it wasn’t easy for her to be there. After all the terrible things that she has said in her futile attempt to tear down Obama she gave the exact speech that one would expect. Every other speaker praised Obama and built the case for electing him. Did Hillary do that? I think not. She is a divisive force and we can expect more of the same from her spouse tonight. Having the Clintons at this convention is an ordeal that the Obamas are being forced to endure. There’s no love lost on either side. Prose, your Freudian slip in reference to Hillary as HRH speaks volumes.By prose
August 27, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this
Didn’t address the terrible things she said about Obama in the campaign? What Fox colored hearing aids were you wearing? I guess Michelle Obama and the rest of the convention delgates are merely dupes in your conspiratorial delusion. Their wild cheering for Hillary’s speech was just a sham? An act of self-deception?Everyone has been hoodwinked by her malevolent charms? What planet are you on? I guess you’ll blame any future election problems on Biden, too. Afterall, he said he could serve proudly on a ticket with McCain. What does that make him, her highness’ court jester? Better send them to GITMO to find out how they really feel about Obama. It’s this Republican style, Whitewater thinking that really could sink the Obama ship. Your alienating politics of party self destruction is just what gives aid and comfort to McBushites. With the sneering, hateful tone and temperament of DINO supporters like you, Obama doesn’t need votes, he needs psychiatric therapy clinics at his state election headquarters. Which other percieved enemies are on your “if he loses” blame list? You’ve often said Nixon was your favorite president. Guess you have a lot in common. You see even your supporters as probable ruthless, conniving enemies. Your Bush-like pre-empitive aggression doesn’t “shock and awe”, rather it “disappoints and dismays”. How little credit you give the millions of hapless Americans who had the temerity to question, criticize, or not vote and prostrate themselves before Mr. Obama. I highly doubt our candidate shares your views. I give him a lot more credit for intellectual honesty and political savvy than your continuous and seemingly limitless, shrill whining. Get over it. Your real enemy doesn’t wear pantsuits. Finally, I must admit to being curious as to what HRC or any one who disagreed with Obama has to do to redeem themselves? Where do they go to profess their sins, and what penance do you think is justified? Since you’ve seemed to appoint youself as grand inquisitor at this witch burning, please share how a heathen finds redemption.By victor mickunas
August 27, 2008 12:27 AM | Link to this
Hillary is being used by McCain. All the terrible things she said about Obama will stand because she failed to address them in her speech tonight. She damned Obama with faint praise. I can’t wait to hear her faithful husband on Wednesday.When you refer to HRH do you mean “Her Royal Highness?” With “friends” like the Clintons who needs enemies?By prose
August 27, 2008 12:03 AM | Link to this
Unbelievable. The seemingly unlimited amount of vituperation and loathing you have for the Clinton’s is sad indeed. During the primary season your venom was an almost daily toxin. Now, at a time where we need unity more than ever you spew your hatred and conspiratorial nonsense like a spanked school child. If Obama snatches defeat from the jaws of victory you’ll have to blame someone. I guess you’ve already sewn the scarlet letter on HRH. I blame viewpoints harbored and published like yours. She gave one of the best supportive speeches I’ve ever seen tonight. I’ve seen many. Expressions like your post drive wedges into party unity I thought only Karl Rove could dream up. Keep defecating in the party mess kit and you will have only yourself to blame. I must admit that I thought you above such damaging, sophomoric polemics. Sadly, you are not. When did you start working for Dick Cheney and the final solution black shirts? Or,are you merely trying to stir the pot for a few cheap responses? In either case you’re a disappointment to me. It’s this kind of crap the R’s love. Hope you enjoy making them happy. I do not.By TRS
August 26, 2008 7:42 PM | Link to this
A good analysis Vic - but for me its hard to pin down the whys. No one is perfect, but then there are flaws and there are flaws. Both Presidents Nixon and Clinton had some deep character issues which ultimately did not serve them well. Is Bill Clinton narcissistic to a flaw? Does personal power and prestige mean more than anything else; thus, do what you have to do; but, if Obama loses then its a hearty “I told you so” and off to the 2012 races? Do they truly believe that Senator Obama is not ready to be President and are simply are going thru the motions? Could be all of the above I guess. When President Clinton was in the midst of his bimbo eruptions and ultimately the Lewinsky scandal, there was great discussion as to whether character mattered, some saying no, only policy. I wonder if thats worth a re-think?