Liz Smith | 05/19/2008 5:43 am

So, You Want to Know Why Hillary Is Still in the Race?

“It is the tragedy and irony of Mrs. Clinton that the year she decided to run for president, her campaign was ambushed by the unforeseen rise of a luminous charismatic candidate.

“It may be the tragedy and irony of Mr. Obama that the year he reached for the far horizon came in the very period when Americans, wondering whether President Bush lacked the experience to succeed in the White House, again made experience the measure of a presidential contender.” — David Shribman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Why is she still in the race? She is the first woman to run for president of the United States. And she has fought the good fight, and the bad fight. She has misspoken without a doubt. She has played hardball just like the other contenders, all men. And she’s not a Mike Huckabee or a Ron Paul; she has run a truly close race.

Testosterone aside, I think Sen. Clinton is sending a message to all women, even to young women who don’t support her; the ones who think Obama is the be-all and end-all. Perhaps someday some of these women will find themselves in a position where they are told to get out, go away, give up. Maybe then they’ll remember Hillary Clinton, a woman who did not get out, go away or give up; a woman who kept fighting and trying.

The senator’s candidacy has become an empowering moment for women, just as Barack Obama’s candidacy has been empowering to the young, the hopeful and to African Americans and other people of all colors.

But if the math were reversed and Sen. Clinton had the numbers to win, what would people say if we told Sen. Obama to get lost, to go away, to give up? I believe he would stay on, realizing the symbolic meaning of his actions as the most unusual candidate in decades.

Sen. Clinton will most likely lose this particular battle. But she has already won some of the war – for women and for others who don’t believe in quitting. I guess if you knew her like I know her, you would find this thrilling, empowering and inspirational instead of behaving as if it is an embarrassment and she should just “go away.”

Note: Click on this text to read my nationally syndicated daily column!

Is It Time for Clinton or Obama to Throw in the Towel?

Mario Cuomo to Liz Smith: Dems Must Get Out of the Way! An Obama-Clinton Ticket Is a Thrilling Possibility

Cokie Roberts on the Chances of an Obama-Hillary Ticket

Joan Cooney: It’s Something I’d Expect From Karl Rove but Not Hillary Supporters

Poll Says Majority of Dems Want Clinton as Vice President

192 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Bob I agree!!!!!!Obama’s supporters are either too young and spoiled or too used to the welfare state to give it up! SAD STATE OF AFFAIR INDEED!

By cat lord on 05/19/2008 10:40 am

e-mail alert

Bob: Have you actually listened to Obama’s views? He hardly advocates for a welfare state. Quite to the contrary, Obama has spoken, passionately, about parents being responsible for their children as well as taking away the video games and making them read and reading to them. His thinking is more aligned with Bill Cosby than some welfare cheat. That said, regretfully, this is the first racially biased post I have read on this site.

By Patricia Burstein on 05/19/2008 10:59 pm

e-mail alert

ooh considering that i have a lot of AA dna 16% I hardly think there is anything racial in my remarks you PROVED MY POINT that if you disagree with ’ mr. sanctimonius Obama you must be Racist. I also do not believe in ‘whites mans burden’ these are the themes that enslave us all. i am for personal freedom period and i do not need a Governemt or a pundit to tell me ‘right from wrong ‘

By bob mirabile on 05/20/2008 8:23 am

e-mail alert

No so. I was taking exception to your words, independent of whom you support.

By Patricia Burstein on 05/22/2008 1:53 am

e-mail alert

Bob Mirabile: Have you actually listened to Obama? He is hardly an enabler of the welfare state. Quite to the contrary, he has spoken passionately about parents being responsible for their children as well as putting away their video games and making them read and reading to them. His views are more aligned with Bill Cosby than the so-called welfare cheat. At the risk of offending you, I must confess that I find your words full of bile, as in (Mira)BILE. Even if I weren’t an Obama supporter, I would find them highly objectionable. Your rant doesn’t belong on this site, one that is fair-minded, informed and compassionate. And, before you accuse me of reverse feminism, I will add that input from men is welome on this site. But, male or female, the voices should comply with basic rules of decency. Your post is more suited to a KKK website.

By Patricia Burstein on 05/19/2008 11:22 pm

e-mail alert

mirabile means ‘wonder of wonders’ to us latinos . I am the CEO of a large company and have earned evey day of and my wealth. we were as poor as anybody could possibly imagine and in 2 generations we have ‘accomplished M.D. Children’ and more My maternal grandmother was AA and i took more than a few beatings to defend her and my families honor from the ‘Anglos’. ‘racism is in the heart ’ Our company is happliy multicultural and believe that all ccultures add to our strenght . I bet you are a ‘Swathmore Liberal’ who is Liberal except in their ‘real personal life’ We think more like a malcom X and a mlk combination and reject ‘handouts’ and believe in self reliance

By bob mirabile on 05/20/2008 8:37 am

e-mail alert

Bob Have you read Shelby Steele? You might like him.

By Frannie Em on 05/22/2008 1:29 pm

e-mail alert

“She has misspoken without a doubt.” You know, Liz, the thing that drives people crazy about Hillary, which you are perpetuating here, is her notion that lying is the same thing as “misspeaking.” When Bob Dole referred to the Brooklyln Dodgers, that was misspeaking. When Gerald Ford said that Poland was “independent and autonomous” from the Soviet Union, that was misspeaking. When Hillary stood up and started a fabricated story with “I remember…”, then concluded with “That’s what happened,” that was a lie. People know the difference, and all she did was remind people of the worst about the Clintons. Both will say whatever is politically expedient and self-serving, whether true or not, then when confronted with it, tell yet another lie.

By Emily W. on 05/19/2008 10:16 am

e-mail alert

Yes! Point well-made. Perhaps Hillary’s demise is about Hillary’s lies. Lies are lies whether from a lipsticked pout or one lined with whiskers. Why does this have to be about sexism and not the integrity and character of the candidate? The right woman in the White House would be an amazing thing, but just because Hillary is the gender I’d like to see doesn’t make her the best choice. That’s her own doing…she lost me when she voted for war in Iraq and sealed the deal when she wouldn’t cop to it publicly as a mistake. Lack of accountability seems scarily “GWB.” And even when you get some erroneous info and that’s what you cast your vote on (as was the case pre-war) when it comes down to it, in retrospect, what’s so hard about saying “oopsies…blew that one.” If that is perceived as a “weakness,” that is really sad and kind of scary.

By T S on 05/19/2008 11:01 am

e-mail alert

Geesh. Again, another commentary that says if you are a woman that doesn’t support Hillary, turn in your girl parts. And, just a history lesson, Hillary is NOT the first woman to run for President. Victoria Woodhall was, in 1878. The government refused to put her name on the ballot. Then came Charlene Mitchell, in 1978. Yes, she ran under the Communist Party and was too young, but she WAS on the ballot in two states. Shirley Chisholm ran during the democratic nomination in 1972. Nothing about Hillary is groundbreaking. And I prefer Shirley Chisholm as my role model, over HRC any day.

By Lorraine Bates on 05/19/2008 10:16 am

e-mail alert

Thank you. Why is it that we must support Sen Clinton just because we share the same gender? Isn’t that just as sexist as refusing to support her because of her gender? We will only have broken through the gender gap when we stop making a big deal about it. I choose to vote for the candidate I think will be best for the job, not for a symbol - of any kind.

By Lane Kowitz on 05/19/2008 10:42 am

e-mail alert

I completely agree. I will vote for the best candiate in each future election, and my choice will not be based on race, gender or creed, but on qualifications, to include integrity and the ability to inspire and lead. It is my right to judge HRC lacking in these areas, regardless of her gender.

By elaine s on 05/19/2008 4:17 pm

e-mail alert

Lorraine ……….. After reading Liz’ commentary I reached for the phone to call my dad (Liz’s remarks on Senator Clinton being the only woman to run for POTUS). Dad is my encyclopdia on politics. While leaving him a voicemail, I saw your post …………Thank you!

By Linda Clark on 05/19/2008 10:42 am

e-mail alert

the fact that you have to call your dad to know says it all

By no longer a fan on 05/19/2008 10:55 am

e-mail alert

Dear D Loe…………Absolutely not, it doesn’t say it all! I converse regularly with my dad as I enjoy his perspective on politics. He has lived in a period of time that I can only read about. His knowledge of politics is well respected by many of his generation.

By Linda Clark on 05/19/2008 11:11 am