Convention-al thoughts on the Dems in Denver

So I'm listening to the radio this a.m., which happens to be 'parked' on a station where a liberal talkin' head has a show in the hour I'm listening to (no, I don't normally listen to that talkin' head, I just happen to have the radio tuned to that station because of something else I normally listen to having been airing the evening before) and said talkin' head is blathering on about what a great speech "she who would be coronated Queen and President for life" gave last night (8/26/2008) at the Democratic National Convention.  [more]Now, I've paid the Democratic convention all the attention to which I think it deserves (read that as just a little more than "none"), as it's all fairly predictable pomp and circumstance even if it may be somewhat historic with the naming of Obama -- an individual of African American descent -- as the party nominee.

I don't feel compelled to watch the convention, listen to the speeches, watch the partying or anything else that is going on in Denver.  My watching or listening isn't going to change my mind, nor will it change the action of any of the candidates, the platform they'll support, etc.

Anyway, to get back to the point of this article, the talkin' head on my radio was praising (gee, is that word ok to use for most Democrats?  'praising' has some religious connotations, no?) the speech that H.R. Clinton gave last night.  Apparently the speech was loaded with 'we' need to do this, and 'we' must do that, and was very much distanced from the 'I' need this and 'I' want that of past H.R. Clinton speeches.  Apparently she is really ready to send the message that in order to give 'us' what 'we' deserve then 'we' must all band together behind Obama and prevent 'them' there evil Republi-McCain-a-cans from winning the election.

Now it doesn't take a gene-E-us, or even a Miss Cleo to figure out that H.R. Clinton was highly likely to do as she's reportedly done here when it was time to do so.  While H.R. Clinton wants the Whitehouse for her own residence again soon, you can be certain that she doesn't want to see another Republican there keeping it warm while she waits.  She also knows that if another Republican (even if mostly in name, not so much in deeds) does win the office it means the progressive programs she wants will be dead on arrival and very likely to be vetoed by such an individual.

So, as we get closer to general election season, H.R. Clinton gives the speech that many (including this writer) feel she should have given long ago, when it was obvious to all but H.R. Clinton herself, her chubby (and chubby chasin') hubby, and a loyal group of Clinton-ites that she was beaten and had no chance at winning the nomination.

Lets look back at how things have unfolded since the dieing days of the H.R. Clinton campaign.  Has she been selected as Obama's running mate?  Nope.  Quite possibly because of her actions and words in the campaign, especially as it was winding down, she was passed over for a chance to quite possibly become the first woman elected as Vice President of the United States.  Yeah, I know that Geraldine Ferraro was the first woman nominated for the office of Vice President of the United States (on a major party ticket) but Ferraro didn't get elected to that office, did she?  H.R. Clinton had a good chance to do so really.  She could have been part of the dream ticket for Democrats, but instead she kept going on, and on, and left many people wondering just what the heck she wanted and what her goal was.

Will H.R. Clinton perhaps find some sort of reward from Obama for her actions at the convention and beyond (assuming H.R. Clinton and the rest of the Clinton clan actually fully support Obama and help him win the election)?  There may already be something in the works there, no?  I'd say it's a good bet something has been worked out, be it an ambassadorship for her hubby, a potential Supreme Court nom for her, or something similar.  Regardless, I'm digressing again and don't mean to....

What I wanted to write about a little, and get more input on from others here is this -- for all of the talk from that those that talked of never supporting Obama if H.R. Clinton didn't get the nomination as the party candidate for the Democrats, will that still be true when it's time to vote in November?  Really, truly, seriously?

What H.R. Clinton's speech was supposedly about (remember, I didn't listen to it, watch, read it, read anything about it, or even listen to much comment about it) was that it's vitally important for the party and the country that the party win this one for everyone.  Is it that important to hold a grudge against Obama because he's not she, or is it more important to keep the Republicans from holding the Presidency for another 4 or 8 years?

My own opinion is that some people talked some pretty big talk and made some dire predictions, but I expect that all of that was just talk.  If they want change, they'll back Obama and hope that no one remembers their blathering of before and tries to hold them to those promises and threats to go to the other side.