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

~ countrywoman ~
Lorraine…..Well said! This one included too.
By ~ countrywoman ~ on 08/22/2008 10:49 pm
Sherrie Crews
Do ” we the people ” really decide who wins in a presidential election ?” By Suzanne O on 08/22/2008 3:07 pm I, sadly, have my doubts about that Suzanne, especially after the last two elections. I see no reason for having political parties, an electorial college, or political districts or wards. To me they all just seem like ways to manipulate the “vote”. When state legislatures can arbitrarily redraw voting districts to achieve the voting demographic they want within that disctrict there’s a huge problem. In this age of computers and instant communication and assimilation of data there I see no reason for having all of those layers between the voters and the results they are voting for. The only problem would be finding somebody honest enough to trust to oversee the assimilation of the data.
By Sherrie Crews on 08/22/2008 3:35 pm
Emcye Edwards
Much here begs for RBTL. (reading between the lines.) First, the fact that Cher and Liz are confabbing is adorable. They are both loved for reasons I’m not sure they really understand. Much here begs for RBTL (reading between the lines.) - and it all proves that politics is just like High School in Vegas. 1. Liz has mentioned more than once that Hillary told her she’s decided to cut Bill loose and proceed without his influencing. Has she passed that note to Bill? (Liz, do you care to share more than that perfunctory statement with your readers? That’s real news, not locker-room banter.) 2. If not (probably not) they are traveling in different circles. And if Bill has influenced Cher to call Liz to push for Hillary, then Bill is completely out of the loop regarding Hillary - AND Obama’s decision for the Dems - which is huge. The Clinton camp is out of the loop and off one another’s radar. Hmm…better rewrite the yearbook. 3. And yes, the neocons are all set to drop a net on Hillary and that’s why Rush tried to sway Republican votes her way. It was Rove Strategy Uno. Net her up and knock her down. To say nothing has been left unsaid about these two? Innacurate, Cher. Rove is the kinda guy who hangs out with hall monitors. 4. And the press bias against women across the board? Chas needs to sit her mother down to watch Rachel Maddow interpret the news. A few years ago Maddow was doing lawn-and-gardening jobs in her pickup truck to make extra cash - and now MSNBC has given her her own show. Her class is really popular with the jocks. She’s respected by the likes of Pat Robertson and Keith Olbermann because she is brilliant, self-assured - and she tells the truth. (Which takes us back to 3.) 4. Also, in these past few weeks, seeing that fact Obama’s VP pick is so universally unknown reminds us how completely in the dark We the People plus the Fourth Estate really are. It’s a good wake-up call for how easy it is for our leadership and their puny quarterbacks to play with our heads. Here we sit, in the bleachers, waiting for the call. At least Obama is honest about keeping his secret. If the Clintons don’t know who the VP will be, then Change really is in the air. I’ve had it with high school in Vegas. But seeing Cher in Vegas? That’d be like skipping out for a glorious mental health day. When she sings The Beat Goes On, it’s meant to be uplifting. Her loyalty is endearing. But I’m surprised Cher’s not singing the praises of Barack and Michelle - she knows how far a harmonizing power-duo can go.
By Emcye Edwards on 08/22/2008 3:38 pm
DeBúrca obj
Great post Emcye Edwards. And I would also like to offer kudos to Liz Smith for including the tidbit of info regarding Cher’s Vegas meeting with Bill Clinton and Paul Begala… by doing so she has done us a good service by providing important information. My guess is it was not the information that Clinton and Begala had in mind.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/22/2008 3:55 pm
Dorothy Stahlnecker
It’s interesting to hear what others think. However, it’s more important to vote according your beliefs and who you feel will help our country be strong and number one again. That choice I have not been able to decide as yet. Dorothy from grammology http://grammology.com
By Dorothy Stahlnecker on 08/22/2008 4:05 pm
Emcye Edwards
When you hear who the VP choice is, that job may be easier for you.
By Emcye Edwards on 08/22/2008 4:12 pm
Buh- Bye
It’s Biden.
By Buh- Bye on 08/23/2008 12:46 am
Emcye Edwards
And easier for Cher, too.
By Emcye Edwards on 08/22/2008 4:13 pm
James the Game
I predicted Hillary and Romney before Nader said anything, but we’ll see what transpires. I don’t have a crystal ball, Liz. But I’m sure Obama has been working with his V.P. choice since July to make sure they’re on the same page come the convention. The reason I suspect it’s Hillary? Because Obama was careful not to use the pronouns “he” or “she” when he said he’d made up his mind on who “that person” will be. If it were not Clinton, I think he would’ve simply said - through Freudian slip, at the very least - that he had made up his mind who “he” is going to be. Perhaps I’m out-thinking myself here - wouldn’t be the first time - but I did notice that.
By James the Game on 08/22/2008 4:20 pm
Fly O. T. Wall
HRC started her campaign with frighteningly high negatives. And her negatives went UP during her campaign! So…help me know why Mr. Obama should think that NOW she is a good choice?
By Fly O. T. Wall on 08/22/2008 4:58 pm
DeBúrca obj
The so-called PUMAs who would rather see this country go down the toilet than vote for Obama because Hillary lost and they cannot admit nor deal with that fact, are actually doing Hillary a lot of harm. This fairly small group is making her appear to be supported by an irrational fringe and any future credibility Clinton was hoping for is really being weakened by them. I think Clinton is worried about them causing problems at the convention and really hurting her image.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/22/2008 6:00 pm
EKA -
At the risk of sounding “Rush-ian”……… Ditto !
By EKA - on 08/22/2008 6:56 pm
Buh- Bye
propaganda with an aim to try to influence people’s behavior
By Buh- Bye on 08/23/2008 12:17 am
sibelle daubigne
Yes Cher Babe i am totally with you! We don’t need a machiavellian verbose and contemplative president! If i had time i would explain to you why you should vote for Mc Cain but you wouldn’t read it either! lol
By sibelle daubigne on 08/22/2008 6:05 pm
DeBúrca obj
Yes, I agree, we need another president who surrounds himself with Neocons and filled his campaign with lobbyists, hired Karl Rove to further drag this country into the slime, can’t pronounce the names of foreign leaders, is in lockstep with the Bush administration, has voted against ever bill ever introduced that would increase veteran’s benefits, even the most recent until he was backed into a corner because even his fellow Republican Senators were voting for it, was against nearly everything he is for now and for nearly everything he’s against now, has a Georgian lobbyist as his chief foriegn advisor and then says “We are all Georgians” in the midst of what could be the beginning of a 2nd Cold War, is known to not listen to the opinions of others, have a violent temper, and operates by his “gut” just like W… it all sounds so promising!
By DeBúrca obj on 08/22/2008 6:14 pm