Text size +

Layers of emotion for Clinton

Posted by Marcella Bombardieri, political reporter December 17, 2007 11:56 AM

JOHNSTON, Iowa – We knew that Hillary Clinton is focused right now on playing up her soft side, but we were still surprised by all the emotion at the podium in a chilly barn here this morning.

Four people whose lives Clinton has touched offered tributes to her – two of them near tears.

One was Jeff Volk, a self-described conservative Republican from New York. He lived through the 9/11 attack from his Wall Street office, and rode out Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, where he’d brought his daughter for her freshman year at Tulane.

Volk had worked in the Nixon White House, but his repeated calls to the White House switchboard during the hurricane went unanswered. After he called Clinton’s office, though, she and her staff never lost touch.

His voice quivered as he called her “one of the most caring, kind, compassionate individuals I’d ever met in my life.”

Shannon Mallozzi described telling Clinton about her daughter’s life threatening illness, and finding the senator wasn’t the remote person she had imagined. “She took my hand and said, ‘I’m a mom too, and but for the grace of God I’d be sitting in your seat.’”

Incidentally, it was interesting that Mallozzi said she was only asked to come here yesterday. It seems the campaign couldn’t have too many testimonials.

Finally, fighting back tears, Clinton’s childhood best friend Betsy Ebeling took the microphone, speaking of Clinton’s loyalty and how when she says hello to a friend it “opens her whole face.”

Clinton told a few old stories, too, describing how Ebeling led her through the halls of school when she left her glasses at home to impress “some boy or another who I hoped would notice me.”

On a different note, she later brought up the idea of a Clinton dynasty to match the Bush dynasty, even though it is a controversial prospect for many voters.

Somebody told her recently, she said, that “it looks like it takes a Clinton to clean up for a Bush.” She didn’t disagree. “I’m ready for the job if that’s what it takes.”

17 comments so far...
  1. Ladies and gentlemen,

    This is what we need to see in Hillary Clinton. The human side.

    I may just become and ex-Republican.

    Posted by Dixie D. Perry December 17, 07 01:47 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Are you kidding, do these politicians think we are all stupid. Everyone has a soft side, only when it is supposed to help with the polls

    Posted by Andrew Morgan December 17, 07 03:41 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Is this all the Boston Globe can find to write about? How childish and how unprofessional! The state of journalism in this clinging Democracy just keeps sinking lower and lower. Shame shame on the Boston Globe.

    Posted by B.E. Gurth December 17, 07 04:16 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Even Prez Bush has a soft side.

    Posted by Vang December 17, 07 04:27 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Yes. Everybody does have a soft side -- including Hillary. It's nice to hear her detractors finally admit it.

    Posted by Michelle December 18, 07 09:41 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Its good to see a refreshing aspect of this campaign. Its now all about the American people's problems and how to solve them. Its all about things that are really important for us, the people of the United States. Healthcare, a veteran's benefits, education. I am a Republican but I cant help but be moved by the testimonials of the people Mrs. Clinton has touched, and along the way admire the way she has kept all of the things she did in her personal capacity private and not brandish it all over the place just like normal politicians do. Its our common humanity that is at work. And Clinton has shown that time and time again. Im really starting to think Mrs Clinton has what it takes to win this election for the Democrats, and that her poll lead nationally is something that she deserves.

    Those who are saying she is the most polarizing candidate, well I guess shes on the right side of things now isnt she? And you just cant accept it. And you people are really the ones propagating the notion of her being unelectable and all of that just to serve your own personal candidate.

    Well all that said, Im still voting for Huckabee. But I expect Clinton to win for the Dems.

    Posted by Chris December 18, 07 10:50 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Hillary 2008!!!!

    Posted by Staci December 18, 07 11:03 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. I’ve always voted Republican in elections — going all the way back to President Ronald Reagan. And guess what, barring something unforeseen, I’m planning to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton in November of 2008 (and yes, folks, I know there’s that little matter of her having to win the nomination). I like Barrack Hussein Obama, too, but he’s frankly a bit too far to the left for me. John Edwards just seems tired and angry to make sound judgments and bring people together

    Posted by Ajay Jain, Dallas, USA December 18, 07 11:40 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. People, pollsters and pundits give undue importance to the Iowa caucus. Isn’t it time to break the back of this myth of Iowa’s importance? They haven’t picked a winner since 1976. And Clinton and Kerry won the democratic nominations without winning in Iowa. Enough with the rural pandering.

    I fondly remember the Bill Clinton administration years as pretty good ones in spite of the personal attacks from the right. The personal problems were Bill’s not Hillary’s. She had to deal with him and the public and she did it expertly with a win as a junior Senator in NY and a re-election where she won 67% of the vote, with 58 of 62 counties including the MOSTly Republican “red” counties in upstate NY.
    In the General election Hillary will beat the pants off any Republican nominee trying to keep us fighting the Iraq war.

    2008 is not the year for the Grand Old Party. Vote for the party that is enthusiastic, raised the biggest money and futuristic forward looking. Vote straight Democratic on Super Tuesday. Vote for Hillary Clinton. Super Tuesday will decide the nominee in both parties and everything else will be settled by February 2008. Forget the early states, the IOWA caucus and all the talk of momentum. A fluke here and a fluke there does not make a nominee. End of discussion.

    Posted by David Smith December 18, 07 11:47 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. ...In a post 9/11 world, the only person I can possibly support (Dem OR Rep), is Hillary Clinton. When the dust settles, Hillary will have destroyed the negative image that the press and republicans have created, and she will be the one in the White House.
    I love you Hill

    Posted by Michael December 18, 07 11:52 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Maybe that is not such a bad thing to return to. But the reality is that Hillary is not Bill. She is by all accounts smarter and definitely won’t have the personal problems that Bill had. She is a master politician and is becoming a master speaker as attested to by looking at her in some of her live appearances and on the recent single sweep of five Sunday news shows in this election cycle.

    It is Hillary’s time and it is the time for a woman to be the US President. It is time to break the highest glass ceiling in the US. I predict that many Republican women will join because they have said “I have never voted or never voted for a Democrat in my life, but if Hillary is the candidate and I have the chance to see a woman US President in my lifetime, Hillary will have my vote!”

    People underestimate the positive change that will occur around the world in the way the United States is viewed when we elect Hillary. She will be symbol for women everywhere.

    It’s time to give up the sniping and for some women to stop venting their jealousy, which is really what it is when they complain not about her policies but about her personal choices as relates to Bill.

    It’s time to think about the nation and Hillary will be good for the nation and the world.

    Posted by Albert Gonzales December 18, 07 11:53 AM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. “As a moderate Republican, I find the remarks about Hillary being too divisive either unreflective or disingenuous. Of all the Democratic candidates, she is the one I would consider voting for because she is the only one who takes seriously America’s role in the wider world. It strikes me that a lot of the animosity towards her is from the far left that wants to return to the labor glory days of the 1930’s. They’re upset because she won’t hew to the MoveOn orthodoxy. The netroots who are drunk now with their power better get some religion soon - a perception that the Democratic nominee is too closely associated with them will be poison in the general election.”

    Posted by George Isaac December 18, 07 12:00 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. The Republicans view Hillary as a “bogeyman” because she fights back against their smears…and because they have sunk way below their previous depths to a point where they have NO positives to run on…they depend on nothing more than the modern equivalent of inciting mobs with pitchforks and torches into voting AGAINST anything/anyone from gays to non-Christians to communism to deficits (until Darth Cheney declared that deficits are GOOD when they’re run up by Republicans) to Bill Clinton. I think their formerly mindless followers are wising up to the fact that their Republican party has not been their friend. The left-wing fringe Democrats are so desperate to put a rehabilitated image of “liberalism” on a pedestal that they aren’t bothering to notice that the nation isn’t becoming, necessarily, more “liberal” as much as it is becoming “anti-right-wing-conservative”…and they hang their hats on my–yes MY–Senator Obama to be their champion without bothering to look at his actual history here in Illinois. He is NOT exactly a “liberal”, and he hasn’t proven that he can LEAD, let alone be an executive. You can’t base your entire candidacy on (a) not supporting the Iraq invasion during your tenure in the Illinois State Senate (which can’t even manage to do the State’s business right now), and (b) NOT being Hillary. Edwards would be in the single digits were it not for sympathy for his wife (if it weren’t for her tragic cancer, she’d make a better candidate), and ALL of the Republican candidates are flip-flopping jokes worse than fish just pulled out of the water.
    You are absolutely right in pointing out Hillary’s re-election support in highly-Republican Upstate New York…THEY have had her representing them for almost 8 years, and their Republican support of her says all that needs to be said. Her Republican Senate colleagues speak highly of her, too…she is OBVIOUSLY NOT a polarizing figure, but the fringes in both parties still try to paint her as one for the very simple reason that they are trying to beat her in the upcoming elections…and because she DOES know what she’s talking about and DOES have more than basic competence, the only way they can beat her is to plant the red herring that many people have preconceived notions of not liking her. They are TRYING to scare support away from her without letting people see her for herself…without her being filtered and framed by the fringes of both parties. And they seem to forget that Bush was re-elected with some very high negatives…people are so numbed by the partisan sniping of the past 12 years and incompetence of the past 6 years that personal negatives don’t matter to them nearly as much as much as intelligence and competence do now.
    I hope that these people start pulling their heads out of their backsides pretty darned quick…and stop living in the past…and stop spewing the old venom that no one is interested in hearing anymore. The Nation has work to do, and no one is better versed, better educated, and better qualified to lead it out of the Republican-created nightmare…ready to roll up sleeves and get to work on Day 1…than Hillary. And when she DOES get elected, I hope that the Republicans give her the deference due her as President that they never gave her husband but expected for his successor for the 8 years to which we have been subjugated. They had their chance, and they’ve perverted everything they’ve touched. It’s time for a woman to clean the White House!

    Posted by Russel Lively December 18, 07 12:03 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. These are some of the most intelligent comments I've seen relating to the upcoming elections. Nice to know there are still some clear thinking Americans out there. I'll be visiting this paper more often.

    Posted by M. Huntington December 18, 07 12:18 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. I for one don't understand why Hillary has been so misconstrued for so long. Wanting universal healthcare 15 years before others jumped on the bandwagon stems from a caring, humane and prescient heart, not one that pundits gleefully call cold and calculating. How can the person who accomplished the following have anything but a good heart and for her to endure all the negative misperceptions about her over the years while continuing to fight on truly shows that she has commitment to people's well-being before her own image:

    As First Lady, Hillary helped create SCHIP, which provides health insurance for more than 6 million children: As First Lady, Hillary helped pass the State Children's Health Insurance Program. She helped negotiate the bill with Congress and later was the point person working to ensure that parents across the country knew about the program and signed up their children. "Over the course of a year, the program, financed jointly by the federal government and the states, provides health insurance to six million children in families that have too much income to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to buy private insurance." [White House Press Release 10/17/00; New York Times, 3/14/07]
    As Senator, Hillary helped ensure that 370,000 children did not lose coverage: As Senator, Clinton successfully sponsored legislation to extend $2.7 billion in unused State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) funding. Because the Clinton-backed bill became law, the $2.7 billion in expiring funds will now go to the states for their intended purpose - health coverage for children. This action alone prevented 360,000 children nationwide from losing coverage. Recently, Hillary introduced a major expansion of the program, extending children's health coverage to families up to 400% of the federal poverty level (which is $70,000 for a family of three). [HRC Press Release 8/14/03; Hillary release, 3/14/07 ]

    Posted by ellen December 18, 07 12:56 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. A whole lot of mud has been thrown towards this woman, yet here she is moving us with her compassion to those in need. A lot of the insults she recieved, are way below the belt! Its a shame that most of it comes from the Dems. Its a shame that people bash their own instead of advancing our common cause!

    I am a black woman. A proud black woman. And I am an independent voter. I used to lean toward Obama, and i was close to being sure he'll be the one I'll caucus for, but looking back at the things Hillary did, for children most of all, I think I know who my candidate will be on Jan 3. For someone who can fight the fight for the most helpless of us, it shows a lot of character, intelligence and passion.

    I have nothing againts Obama, I always believe in hoping for change. Bu I will caucus for Hillary now, knowing full well and with confidence that she will get things done.

    Posted by Tanisha Jones December 18, 07 01:17 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. I am so glad to find intelligent comments for once. Hillary is not polarizing..Hillary is the only one who can get things done because she knows how to achieve bi-partisan support.
    Let's be honest. This country is bi-partisan, for every Pro-choice person there is a pro-life..it's hard to please either the Liberal or the Conservative, but what can be done is meet them in the middle..and Hillary is the only candidate smart and experienced enough to do this from day one!
    It bothers me when any of her rivals bring up "electability" when within their own party Hillary already has a 20% national lead....talk about "electability" when you're not able to convince your own party to wote for you, how is it that they're going to get those other swing votes on the general election?
    I'm sorry but out of the Democratic candidades, I think the only one who stands a chance against Giuliani, McCain and Huckabee is Hillary.
    If Obama wins the nomination they're going to tear him appart, they will use his issues from the past as a negative campaign after him.....I know everyone says it's a "cheap shot" to even bring it up...but when the general elections come do you think the other party will stop to think of that.

    Tthey have always gone for the cheapes shots, and that's how they convince they're ultra conservative voters to come out and make a statement in the ballots.

    Posted by Gaby December 19, 07 09:04 AM
    Reply | Report this post
add your comment
Required
Required (will not be published)
About political intelligence Field reports from Boston Globe reporters and editors covering the 2008 presidential campaign and the national maneuvering of Bay State politicians.

Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com

archives

browse this blog

by category
by tag