From AP: "Dodges undercut Clinton image"
Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign slogan is "Ready for Change, Ready to Lead" yet she has adopted the time-honored, front-runner strategy of dodging tough questions, contradicting the image of a strong leader.For the record, here's her non-stance on Social Security:
The former first lady and New York senator refused to take a position on a range of substantive issues during Wednesday night's debate, from Social Security reform to U.S. troop deployments in Iraq to whether Israel, if threatened, has the right to attack Iran.
She even ducked the question of which team she'd root for if her hometown Chicago Cubs met the New York Yankees in next month's World Series. "Well, I would probably have to alternate sides," she said.
She dodged when asked what she would "put on the table" to save Social Security, such as a proposal to raise Social Security taxes on incomes above $97,000. "I'm not putting anything on the proverbial table until we move toward fiscal responsibility," she said, adding, "I don't think I should be negotiating about what I would do as president.There's a word for that folks, and it's "leadership." What? It's not? Nevermind.
7 comments:
It doesn't matter what Hillary says or doesn't say. She's going to be the President, which is something that could NEVER have happened with even a mediocre Bush administration.
Hillary Clinton is Bush's farewell gift to the Republican Party, as they unsteadily rise back to a standing position, their pants bunched around their ankles, and wondering whether that searing pain they feel where they sit was always there.
I've always found it fascinating that Democrats are so void of political will that they take a "win" as some kind of public affirmation.
The Democrats "won" Congress and wrought the sweeping change of...slightly raising the minimum wage. It's baffling that they only have an 11% approval rating.
Yeah, Hillary will probably win (I've said as much). And what will she do? Nothing in Iraq, nothing to fix Social Security, and her health care program will never get through a Democratic Congress, just like in 1993.
But, hey, you'll have that election "win." Good for you.
Holy mackerel, what has GWBush done for conservatism except win three elections? Why does Karl Rove even exist? But to you, that's a Democratic failing? Talk about the silliest, spinniest kind of psychological projection.
Your blog shows that you're not a rah-rah-we're-winning-stick-with-Dubya-4ever guy, but puh-leeze. Those rudderless Democrats and their empty lust for victory? Really? That's what you're going with?
Dems are wrong to take election results as "some kind of public affirmation," but you're interpreting an 11% approval rating as the opposite? The wretched approval rating for Congress is ANOTHER "Bush stinks" vote. They're not blocking him successfully or swiftly enough. That's why they're being punished in polls now, but what of it? That "11%" talisman won't do you or the Republicans any good in next year's election, unless H. Ross Perot has been cloning himself in secret.
Bush is the anti-Reagan; his period of success has actually DAMAGED the GOP brand. And no matter how accurate your prediction of Hillary's non-accomplishments turns out to be, she (or whoever wins) is certain to be seen as a decent President, merely by the luck of following this unbelievable chump.
Who says Bush Derangement Syndrome is a myth? Believe it or not, Dubya isn't the sum total of the Republican Party. But, since we're on it, Bush is dragging down his party precisely because he refuses to back down from what he believes is right.
The Democrats? Their motto is: "Those are my beliefs and, if you don't like 'em, we've got others." In 2004, the closest thing they had to a conscious was Vermont (of course) governor Howard Dean. But the moment he was deemed "unelectable" the Dems ran for the "electable" candidate John Kerry.
Kerry spent exactly 30 seconds in his nominating speech talking about the strong convictions he's carried during his 20 years in the Senate, followed by 50 minutes of Vietnam.
So, yeah, I'm going with "rudderless." As some other blogger wrote, the American public has given the Democrats unprecedented "cover" to stop the war in Iraq but *still* they have no courage of their convictions. (A point echoed by Eugene Robinson in today's Washington Post.)
So good luck with all your pending wins. The Democrats are like boats that are launched but don't go anywhere - just rise and fall with the tide.
1. How many Americans suffer from "Bush Derangement Syndrome" now? 65%? 70%? When did "being right first" become a medical condition?
2. It's a lot better than Battered Wife Syndrome.
3. With those rudderless Dems holding sway, it's a lucky thing Americans have an alternative party that stands firm on its core beliefs and unshakable convictions: smaller government, financial restraint, respect for law and order, competence and accountability...
VP: Wasn't it just the other day you were approvingly quoting Allan Greenspan to the effect that the Republicans, having traded principle for power, now had neither?
Yeah, you got me there, and I did criticize Bush for signing the Prescription Drug Benefit. But the way the Democrats demogogued Social Security reform for political gain - when they KNOW it's a problem that needs to be fixed - really disgusted me.
Yeah, the GOP plays the same game, and maybe it's just a matter of degrees, but if the Republicans didn't exist the Democrats would have to invent them so they knew what to oppose.
Post a Comment