Posted on 04/17/2008 10:46:15 PM PDT by Aristotelian
On Tuesday at Washington's Convention Center, Hillary Clinton made the best speech of her campaign. She told the American Society of Newspaper Editors how she conceives "the power and promise of the presidency." She asserted that President Bush had been "unready" for the office, did not understand its "constitutional character," exhibited in his decisions an "ideological disdain." She said she hopes to "restore balance and purpose" to the presidency, and detailed specific actions she would take immediately on entering the White House.
It was an important speech, and someone, probably many someones, worked hard on it. It was highly partisan, even polar, but it was a more thoughtful critique of the administration, more densely woven and less bromidic, than she has offered in the past, and she used a higher vocabulary. So eager was she to be heard she actually noted at one point that what she'd just said was not "a soundbite."
And here's the thing. It didn't matter. Nobody noticed. A room full of journalists didn't notice this was something new and interesting. And they didn't notice because nobody is listening anymore.
Mrs. Clinton is transmitting, but people aren't receiving. She has been branded, tagged. She's been absorbed, understood and categorized. People have decided what they think, and it's not good.
It took George W. Bush five years to get to that point. It took her five intense months.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Who cares about this shrill anyway? I’m waiting for her to come out and endorse Osama Hussein (after her fawning and shmeful 1-hr long praise of him on MTP a couple of weeks ago).
Bravo, Peggy, Bravo!!!
Sun, skin cancer.......
.....Sun, skin cancer.......
.....Sun, vitimin D....
Benefits outweigh the risk
I don't see any 'obvious' VP picks out there. Bush has so neglected his role as party leader that he has allowed several of the better conservative office holders to get picked off. Santorum is gone. George Allen is gone. That's just off the top of my head. "Conventional Wisdom" says McCain should pick a conservative runningmate, but the one's with national stature are damaged goods.
Santorum got beat by idiotic republicans in Pa who wanted to “teach a lesson” because he dared to endorce Specter rather than Toomey.. had nothing to do with Bush, just foolish petty voters in PA.. who have have a guy as their Senator who is harder to find than waldo, and less qualified than Fauxbama.
You didn’t go far enough in your analysis. Santorum was carrying Bush’s water for him when he supported Specter over Toomey.
No, Santorum was putting party before himself. Toomey could not win the general, and holding onto the Senate was more important than pandering.
I hate to say it, but Hillary’s appearance has been very mannish. We’ll see if she tries to be more feminine in appearance at some point.
>>She asserted that President Bush had been “unready” for the office, did not understand its “constitutional character,” exhibited in his decisions an “ideological disdain.”<<
“Ideological disdain?” Sounds like Obama. Hillary Clinton is keeping her disdain under wraps for now, but make no mistake, she has plenty.
Democrats’ Damaging Brawl - Clinton and Obama are paving the way to a McCain win.
The Washington Post | April 20, 2008 | David S. Broder
Posted on 04/19/2008 10:23:27 PM PDT by Aristotelian
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2004238/posts
Wright Is Out To Destroy Obama...says Time’s Joe Klein
Townhall.com | 4/28/08 | Hugh Hewitt
Posted on 04/28/2008 9:39:18 AM PDT by LJayne
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2008118/posts
Hillary Clinton has just the right strategy — for 2012
St. Louis Post-Dispatch | 4-25-08 | Bill McClellan
Posted on 04/25/2008 11:46:37 AM PDT by kingattax
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2007003/posts
[snip] It became clear a couple of months ago that Barack Obama was going to get the nomination. Given the way the delegates are allotted on a proportional basis rather than on a winner-take-all basis, Obama’s lead became insurmountable during his winning streak. And there was never a realistic hope that the superdelegates would overrule the will of the voters. If they did, there would be chaos. The party would risk alienating its single most faithful bloc — African-Americans... You’ve got to hope that [Obama] loses the general election. If he wins in 2008, he’ll run for re-election in 2012. That means... Hillary would be... 69 by [2016]... Also, the odds will be against the Democrat in 2016. This is true no matter how Obama does in 2012. [end]
To the contrary, I find brutal honesty quite refreshing.
When I wrote that, I had my tongue planted firmly in my cheek.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.