Clintonista Robert Reich is a little disappointed in his old friend Hillary, as he writes on his blog in a post headlined, "Why is HRC Stooping So Low?"
… Yesterday, HRC suggested O lacks courage. "There’s a big difference
between our courage and our convictions, what we believe and what we’re
willing to fight for," she told reporters in Iowa, saying Iowa voters
will have a choice "between someone who talks the talk, and somebody
who’s walked the walk." Then asked whether she intended to raise
questions about O’s character, she said: "It’s beginning to look a lot
like that."I just don’t get it. If there’s anyone in the race
whose history shows unique courage and character, it’s Barack Obama.
HRC’s campaign, by contrast, is singularly lacking in conviction about
anything. Her pollster, Mark Penn, has advised her to take no bold
positions and continuously seek the political center, which is exactly
what she’s been doing.All is fair in love, war, and politics.
But this series of slurs doesn’t serve HRC well. It will turn off
voters in Iowa, as in the rest of the country. If she’s worried her
polls are dropping, this is not the way to build them back up.
To the extent that he’s got a point, it’s related to the point I was making back here. Obama continues to be, by comparison to his chief rival, the guy who’s following the high road. And it seems to be paying off for him, finally.
Related Posts
The more I look at the candidates, the more I think Obama is the best choice. Even if Clinton did not strike me as a political construct, her name is so polarizing to so many people that I fear that whatever good she might do could not possibly be seen by those people. Edwards is a populist, but I have no idea where he thinks he’s going to get all the money for his give-away plans. Kucinich–well, no. Obama has a long standing reputation of being willing to hear anyone out. He then makes his own decisions, but he tries to be inclusive and to work with others on either side of the liberal/conservative divide as much as he can. We could do far worse, I’m convinced. Meanwhile, if Clinton starts getting down and dirty, I truly believe it will hurt her more than him.
Hillary needs to simply RETIRE along with her husband but instead they are like that ever-ready battery rabbit that never stops so hopefully soon they will retire because the USA does not need them in the White House again….
This is why we need Hillary:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/world/middleeast/04intel.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Apparently our president was aware, probably since August, of the major findings in this NIE report and just simply lied about the threat level from Iran. His lies are no surprise of course, after all our current quagmire in Iraq was built on a pack of lies. But why release this report now? A number of reasons come up in the blogosphere but the most compelling is that high ranking members of the military were up in arms about the possibility of a military strike against Iran and the president simply needed a way out of his ongoing rhetoric. The NIE report provided the cover to retreat from his WW III demogagory.
It’s time to stop all these natering, and frankly groundless, assaults on Senator Clinton and give her a bit of respect. She and her husband did an extraordinary job building the U.S. into the great nation that it was in the first year of the 21st century. Now after 7 years of largely Republican (i.e. incompetent) rule we have international chaos, $3 gasoline, endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (both of which set record American deaths in 2007) and a generally disasterous economic outlook for many Americans. We need to bring back that Clinton magic.
What we don’t need is some war-mongering Republican to continue the horror of the Bush years. It’s time for the press to stop all this negativity and focus on the correct reasons for selecting a president. If that is ever done the clear choice will be Hillary Clinton.
“Lied?” Why does everything have to be so black-and-white with you, bud? You can’t just disagree with someone, it seems — that person has to be thoroughly evil, and have nothing but the worst motives.
This is what I hope we can get away from, whoever becomes president. My worry, as previously expressed, about Mrs. Clinton is that it may be hardest to put this garbage behind us if she is the Democratic nominee. Almost any other candidate would make it easier to move to a time when we can disagree, and actually hear each other. The shame of it is, I don’t think there’s anything she can do about that; it’s just the way things are.
Brad, there’s no grey in this story. What else would you call it when a person stridently and repeatidly characterizes Iran as an imminent threat to develop nuclear weapons even though that person has access to information that suggests the “threatening” program was cancelled 4 years earlier? Have you even read the stories about this incident? How can that be characterized as anything but a bald-faced LIE?
As for Hillary, the only reason she is perceived as “divisive” is because your friends in the press go along with all the right-wing demagogary from the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the world. If the press would harp on Keating 5 (McCain), Adultery (Guiliani), Flip-Flopping (Romney) or Tax Increases (Huckabee) to the same extent they focus on Senator Clinton’s past they too would appear divisive.
“She and her husband did an extraordinary job building the U.S. into the great nation that it was in the first year of the 21st century.”
The Clintons built the U.S. into a great nation?
Didn’t they really just hand Bush a house of foreign-policy cards that was about to fall aflame into the streets of New York?
Didn’t they really just surf what was left of the economic wave Reagan’s tax cuts created and sell our economy and national security down the river whenever they had the chance?
Visionaries built the U.S. into a great nation long years before the Clintons drew first breath, Bud. They’ve spent their whole lives merely building a place for themselves.