Clinton Doubletalk
Dec 23, 2007 Political
B. Hussein Obama said that he has more former Clinton (Bill) foreign policy advisers working for him than Hillary does and that this should show people something. While this claim might or might not be true the Clinton camp felt it was necessary to answer the charge. I can understand why because even if Obama does not have more of them he has a significant number of them and this really should cause people to ask; if she is so wonderful why are her hubby’s former advisers backing her rival?
The Hillary Clinton camp could have answered this charge in a number of ways. They could have ignored it (which is a non answer, really) they could indicated that people do not vote for advisers, which is what they did and if they had stopped there, they might have made the point. Instead, Hillary went one step further by describing the large number of advisers that she does have.
“This is not a campaign between lists of advisers,” Clinton told reporters in a packed diner. “This is a campaign between real people with experience and qualifications to become president on day one.”
~snip~
“Why is the national security adviser of Bill Clinton, the secretary of the Navy of Bill Clinton, the assistant secretary of state for Bill Clinton, why are all these people endorsing me?” Obama said. “They apparently believe that my vision of foreign policy is better suited for the 21st century.”
Clinton rejected the comment’s premise.
“Honestly, it’s a silly question. We have hundreds of people’s support, not just people who were in my husband’s administration, but people from all over the country who have expertise.”
She added: “It’s important to pick the person who can make the best decision, who is tested and proven as a leader.” My Way News
Hillary contends that this is not a campaign about advisers but about experience and then she goes on to say how many advisers she has. If this is a campaign about experience, as she said, then she should have expanded the experience part. Instead, she expanded that which she just said was not important. She said that people do not vote for advisers and then told everyone how many advisers she has.
The reason for this is quite simple, Hillary Clinton does not have the experience she wants everyone to believe she has. Obama has held elected office longer, Obama was against the war in Iraq (though he was not in the Senate) and he voted against the Iran resolution. No matter what one thinks about these issues, Obama and Hillary were opposites on them and if the Democratic base is using the war as the bellwether (this issue is why they say they won the election) than Obama is clearly more in tune with the base than Hillary is. This might be because she triangulated in order to appeal to the general election voters (she was supposed to win the primaries, hands down).
This is more Clinton double speak. They are already down playing the Iowa caucus and lowering expectations. They are doing the same in Hew Hampshire. It is true that Hillary is in trouble in those states but there are reasons for this ploy. They will be able to say they expected the losses if she in fact loses one or both states and if she wins both they can say she is the second coming of the comeback kid. They will say that Iowa and NH were always going to be tough and she never figured to win but she is the comeback kid like her hubby. The reality is, Hillary and her people have been predicting she was the inevitable winner for a year because she held huge leads for most of it.
I can’t figure how she has any support because she talks out of both sides of her face and she has not been truthful for years (remember, she said she never thought about running for president and then jumped right in the race). She has the highest negative ratings of any candidate and she is very polarizing. I might not agree with Obama’s politics but at least he appears to be a warm and charming person.
Hillary is toast and I cannot wait for her to lose so that we can finally rid this country of the vermin known as Clinton.
