That Obama-Clinton Chemistry (Joint 60-Minutes Interview)
Last edited Mon Jan 28, 2013, 01:43 PM - Edit history (2)
from Joan Walsh at Salon: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/that_obama_clinton_chemistry/
That Obama-Clinton Chemistry
It wasn't about 2016. It was about two hard-working "gluttons for punishment" enjoying their unlikely friendship
. . . I’m not entirely sure why the joint interview, which was hyped for so many days, whose hype I resisted, wound up being so affecting. But let me throw out a few thoughts about it.
I’m sure most of it was the bitter battle between the two of them. It was nice to see that Obama giving Clinton a tough and high-profile job wasn’t merely placating or co-opting a rival. And maybe the glow was just what happens when two charismatic figures with adorable chemistry appear together. We’ve seen them together only briefly on stage. We’ve seen them, sadly, at the homecoming for dead heroes like Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and the other Americans killed in Benghazi.
There may simply be a remarkable charge when these two amazing firsts – first African American president, first 18-million-cracks-in-the-glass-ceiling female candidate — come together. And when they don’t fight, like those firsts are supposed to do, and once did, but they glory in one another’s radiance, and they support one another.
. . . So set aside 2016. I’m not sure why the president wanted to do the joint interview – Steve Kroft said it was his idea, which is interesting, but who really knows? But I’m glad they did. In this era of ugly near mortal political combat, it’s reassuring when two formal rivals come together. Their obvious physical comfort and warmth was strangely moving.
Seeing two of the world’s most powerful people, who happen to be a black man and a white woman, leaning in against one another and laughing and sighing, sharing their enjoyment of one another’s company and their relief at the hard times they’ve seen the country through — well, now I’m not sure why I was acting like it was hard to explain its delight. It was delightful.
read: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/28/that_obama_clinton_chemistry/
watch:
part 2:
= new reply since forum marked as read
Methinks the headline writer was smoking something that made him a little rhapsodic. This sounds like something out of North Korea propaganda.
not as godlike figures who "radiate" and create feelings of "glory."
The wording is extremely silly, and *particularly* ridiculous when used for politicians. That's all. 
That's a little disturbing....
They're good for you. Really.
I actually thought of this one:
I almost forgot about it.
MadTV was great, better than SNL. The video was meant in good fun.
when I told her I was not preparing for the rapture.
She got really miffed about it, too.
Visually speaking, they look good together. They also have similar temperaments. They are both analytical, pragmatic and don't suffer fools gladly. They are not as outgoing as their spouses, but I think that as time went on they both have learned to enjoy the crowds.
By all accounts, they have enjoyed a good working relationship and have forged a friendship of sorts.
There are only a handful of people who have reached the upper echelon of politics. Regardless of party affiliation, presidents do have many things in common and know exactly what a sitting president is going through.
I only had a chance to see part 1.
Great interview...two great people, that set aside their differences, to work together making us a stonger, safer Nation. They are partners in progress. They Respect each other, as they Respect the people of this nation.
We are all better for that.
Hillary will be sorely missed at State. I am so proud of these two incredible leaders.
Can you even imagine what we might have had "instead?"
I love them both! 
. . . 