Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Liz Smith | 08/22/2008 9:00 am

Cher To Hillary: We Want You, Babe!

Clinton: photo by Barbara Kinney/Flickr.com; Cher: Getty

"I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat," said P. J. O’Rourke.

——————————

What has happened on the pre-convention scene since last Wednesday has set political junkies on their ear! After he won the primary, Barack Obama looked like an unbeatable Democratic candidate. But, Sen. Hillary Clinton, who fought the good fight and emerged as an ever-more important and dynamic persona, would still not be his choice for vice president. Those of us Democrats who were for her — that is, the rational ones among us — accepted this fact and turned our support to Obama. He has many appealing qualities and his election is important to anyone who has their mind on the far right drift of the Supreme Court.

But then matters began to slide and this columnist has said on a number of recent occasions that if Obama wants to ensure his election, he needs to look again at Hillary. (I said this last Tuesday on CNN’s "American Morning" with John Roberts. Click here to watch the clip.) I also remarked on the unpleasant reality — to many — of Sen. Clinton’s famous husband’s omnipresence. But I believe it won’t be a factor. I think she would force him to butt out! Her loss in the primary taught her a great lesson and I know this for a fact.

——————————

Nobody paid a bit of attention to my chiding Obama to take Hillary as a precaution, if not as the best of a lot of dreary choices. Then Wednesday night, following Ralph Nader’s astonishing prediction that just what we’ve said here should happen, would  happen —  all the talking heads on TV began a drumbeat — it should be, it will be Hillary, Hillary, Hillary!  And as Obama’s polls shortened the distance between him and John McCain, people said this more and more.

So you won’t be surprised to learn that one of the most famous superstars the ’60s, ’70s, ’80s, ’90s — now on her eternal comeback career — telephoned us entirely on her own initiative to have her say.

If you don’t care about celebs endorsing politicians, then so be it. If you are curious — read on.

——————————

My phone rings midday Wednesday. A slightly hoarse, husky woman’s voice says, "Liz? Do you know who this is?" The voice is familiar, but I can’t be sure. Am I in an old American Express commercial? I hate guessing games. "No, who is this?" I reply with more acerbity than intended. "Oh, I love when people don’t know. Liz, it’s Cher!" Indeed it is Cher, fighting a strained throat, courtesy of her ongoing Las Vegas gig.

Cher says, "I have something I want to tell you." Visions of wedding invitations or a Korean baby adoption dance through my head. "Yes?" Cher gives with the big reveal, with no preamble: "If Barack Obama does not pick Hillary Clinton as his running mate, he is going to lose this election." I start to respond, but Cher is on a roll "I think millions won’t vote. And not just the ‘uneducated, blue-collar women,’ as the media condescendingly refers to Hillary supporters."

Cher, it seems, has decided to take no prisoners on this one. She is certainty itself. "He can’t win without her. No other running mate can help him. He needs her. She is formidable in ways he is not — at least not yet." I venture then the caution that Republicans have a standing "Get Hillary" campaign ready to go. Cher snorts: "There is nothing more to be said about her. She and Bill Clinton have been the victim of every ghastly accusation. They have
survived."

Of Obama, Cher says: "I like him. He is a good person. Intelligent and thoughtful. But he comes off as too thoughtful. We don’t need a verbose and contemplative president. We need  a roll-up-your-sleeves-get-down-there kind of person. Hillary was and is that kind of person. She was the best choice to be president. But that’s not gonna’ happen right now. So the next best thing is she’s gotta’ be there to help him. You can’t win an election on a bumper sticker about ‘change.’ Every politician
promises change! What’s new?"

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

DeBúrca obj
Thanks! I wonder if Newton is meeting with McCain and Rove in Vegas as we speak!
By DeBúrca obj on 08/22/2008 8:07 pm
Linda Mason
Marjarie, HRC and her supporters are in no position to complain about the caucuses and how they were run. To set the record straight: HRC went through the primary touting her superior “experience..” Well, she also went through 2 presidential campaigns with Bill before 2008, and therefore, she has no excuse for being completely out-manuevered by Obama, a newcomer to federal campaigns. Where was her much bally-hooed experience in the caucuses? In rounding up superdelegates? As far as the superdelegates were concerned, at first, she took them for granted. When it became clear she was in trouble, she committed tactical blunders again. The superdelegates did not appreciate such tactics as Bill screaming at them, demanding that they support Hillary — not just over the phone, but face-to-face! You can’t treat people like that and then cry “sexism” (unless, of course, you’re the Clintons). At the end of the day, the Superdelegates had alot of resentment toward the Clintons, and Obama did well enough in the popular vote and the caucuses that they dared to “defy” Billary and vote their true preference.
By Linda Mason on 08/22/2008 7:35 pm
EKA -
Welcome to the fray, Linda ! I took my husband to see Obama in Hartford the day before Super Tuesday. While we were in line I struck up a conversation with the people around me: young, old, white, black, asian. Several of the African/Americans told me they were always for Hillary. What changed their minds was the comment that Bill made about Obama being like Jesse Jackson. “That did it” they said, no more Hillary OR Bill. Just an anecdote but I think that happened all over the country. Bill ruined it for her, consciously or un-consciously…. we’ll never know !
By EKA - on 08/22/2008 9:10 pm
beth willis
I’ve successfully identified two candidates whom I could support immediately; If Obama chooses outside that duo, I will require another period of refocusing. First is Senator Hillary Clinton and the other first Is Senator Joe Biden. Cher’s opinion is no more relevant than any other American’s, but she doesn’t lose her right to an opinion because she is a celebrity. We are afforded the opportunity to express our opinions daily. Cher is no better, but she certainly isn’t worse. “He who is without sin……………” Peace and grace
By beth willis on 08/22/2008 12:17 pm
Sharon Belko
I don’t know how I can agree with so many of the above threads - but I do! AND the scariest thing of all is thinking that McCain might win (no matter who Obama has on the ticket). It’s a possibility that has me wishing I could clone myself and work twice as hard for Obama. This country simply canNOT tolerate any more of the destructive actions of the last eight years!
By Sharon Belko on 08/22/2008 12:50 pm
EKA -
This is just so un-freaking-believeble ! Is Bill Clinton such a narscisist that he is willing to destroy the democratic party and elect John McCain… is that what he really wants ?? Do we want 4-8 more years of Bush/Cheney/ McCain and the destruction they have done to this country, more wars, possibly with the russians, a draft, more conservative supreme court justices ??? IS THAT WHAT HE WANTS ? Because Hillary ran a terrible campaign and lost ? Is that what women and mothers want ? Shame on the Clintons, because if they don’t stop this, this is what we will get. Did the past eight years not convince you of anything ? Because if we all don’t get behind Obama that is what you will get. The stakes are way too high here, continued support for Hillary will continue the fiasco of George Bush ! IS THAT WHAT YOU REALLY WANT ?? This is much more important than hurt feelings, slights, misogyny … this is our childrens future, our country’s future. Enough !
By EKA - on 08/22/2008 1:32 pm
Sharon Belko
Eka - AMEN to you and once again AMEN! That message should be forwarded to every media outlet in the country in CAPS! (And to the Clintons!)
By Sharon Belko on 08/22/2008 1:41 pm
DeBúrca obj
EKA… a lot of people believe it IS what the Clintons want. If Obama wins she would have to wait 8 yrs to really make a second attempt at it, but if McCain wins she can start now working toward campaigning for it again in 4 years… and mark my words, if she does, she will scrap the lousy, out dated methods she used this time around and copy the Obama style campaign. If any damage has been done to the Clintons, they have done it themselves with this sort of underhanded behavior.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/22/2008 3:41 pm
Amelie Poulain
Hey dB. Once again, I stumble across your words which echo my own. Very true. One can likely rest easy in knowing that if McCain wins, Obama’s brill-political machine will not be available to Hill-Billy. Hillary will have to fire her peeps and find new ones because I suspect Obama inspires fierce loyalty and they will be out in full force campaigning for another 4 years to beat her yet again.
By Amelie Poulain on 08/22/2008 10:36 pm
Marjorie C.
EKA, the Clintons cannot stop ‘this’, it has gone too far.
By Marjorie C. on 08/22/2008 5:20 pm
EKA -
What they CAN stop is angry democrats who think they can stay home, or vote for McCain, as some warped idea of showing support for Hillary. They can do a little straight talk to their supporters and lay out the stakes. They can be true democrats and work their butts off to remind people that Obama agrees with them 100% more than McCain, that if they are real democrats, they will put their country first and stop Bush/McCain. You think this has gone too far ?, what do you think 4 - 8 more years of Republicans will mean. It is cutting off your nose to spite your face !
By EKA - on 08/22/2008 6:35 pm
Marjorie C.
EKA, Hillary has been trying to turn it around. It is about her anymore, it’s about former Democrats being very disenchanted about their party leaders and about many people being very opposed to an Obama presidency. I’m a registered independent, I vote for the person not the party so I don’t feel I’m cutting off my nose to spite my face. A McCain presidency works for me.
By Marjorie C. on 08/23/2008 8:50 am
Marjorie C.
Correction: “It is about her anymore,” should be It is NOT about her anymore.
By Marjorie C. on 08/23/2008 8:54 am
EKA -
I understand where you are coming from, you are voting for the person and not the party. What I don’t understand is….. Hillary and McCain couldn’t be farther apart in positions and values, does that have no meaning ? Was it JUST because Hillary was a woman. Did you not agree with her stand on women’s issues, health care, the face of America in the world ? If you did then you need to follow her in voting for her candidate, Obama. If you just can’t bring yourself to vote for Obama, OK, just please don’t vote for Mccain. I assure you Hillary won’t. Have a good weekend.
By EKA - on 08/23/2008 10:31 am
Marjorie C.
EKA, Hillary was my gal. I thoroughly agreed on everything she stood for. She would have made an excellent president for women. Obama is not Hillary by a long run.
By Marjorie C. on 08/23/2008 12:07 pm