WSJ's Bartley: 'Hillary's the One'

NewsMax.com ^ | 8/04/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton is the only Democrat who can save her party from the impending disaster that would be a Howard Dean presidential campaign.

That's the assessment from Wall Street Journal sage Robert Bartley, who argues on the paper's editorial page today that unless Sen. Clinton comes to the rescue in 2004, the wreckage left behind in the wake of a Dean debacle may not leave her much to work with in 2008.

With the ex-governor of Vermont adorning the cover of this week's Time and Newsweek, experts now say Dean is now the Democrats' bona-fide frontrunner.

Bartley notes, however:

"Watching Mr. Dean's surge in the primaries, Sen. Clinton may have to rethink her preference of delaying a presidential bid until 2008 to run against Gov. Jeb Bush or some other non-incumbent. By then it may be too late, not for her but for her party.

A Dean candidacy, says the Journal scribe, "would stamp Democrats more clearly than ever as a party that runs hoping for a sour economy at home and rooting for American humiliation in Iraq."

"Hillary, she's the one," says Bartley - the only Democrat who save the party from a decade or more in the wilderness.

[Types_with_Fist]

Another "wrap-around" story on comments in an opinion piece from NewsMax. They must have a template.

[El Laton Caliente]

Another missed BARF ALERT!

[laweeks]

Hildabeast CAN'T RUN! I repeat a thousand times, SHE CAN'RUN! (that's not quite a thousand) She'd have to face neutral-to-hostile audiences, and she'd never survive. She and her sleezy "husband" have avoided ALL such audiences for over 10 YEARS, and therefore have never had to be forced to try to answer questions like "Who killed Vince Foster", "Who hired Craig Livinston?", "Why did you put condoms and crack pipes on the White House Christmas trees?", "What part of the theft of the FBI records did you take?", "Why did you steal all those funishings from the White House?",and I can go on and on. I can't see her for a MINUTE facing those questions with anything other than a blank face and a bunch of "I can't remember"s. She appears only with idiot puppets like Bahbwa Wawa and David Letterman who sit there like jerks while she pulls their strings. I can't see it! She's a lot like that goofus Denny Kucinich from Cleveland who knows he doesn't stand a Chinaman's chance of getting elected, but he's enjoying the media's tabloid fascination with the idea. Golly, I hope I'm right.

[randog]

'Hillary's the One'

Personally, I often refer to her as a Number Two.

[Paul Atreides]

Yeah, and Hillary is going to have to do a lot to make people, other than those on the two coasts, like her.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

What republican in govt has dared to ever even mention Hillary in the last 2 years?

Why are they terrified of confrontation with treason spouting socialists?

It doesn't make sense. The election 2 yrs ago was a total waste of voter mandate. Frist, our leader, is a traitor.

Where is this all going, this socialist takeover?

[ex-snook]

Now just why would the WSJ worry about the Democrat Party. Is Dean that much of a threat (to what?).

[ex-snook]

Now just why would the WSJ worry about the Democrat Party. Is Dean that much of a threat (to what?).

[Fee]

Socialism is inevitable in the US. The black/white alliance of the DNC and majority white RNC have divided this country evenly politically and the Hispanic vote is the balancing force. Latest in depth poll indicate that Hispanics are socially conservative but believe in big government services. Sounds more like the Christian Democrats/Socialist Parties of Europe. Since both parties will court this largest and fastest growing group in the US, the RNC will join the DNC in becoming more Socialistic.

[Types_with_Fist]

Disagree..."Has joined."

[MHT]

The press would never ask her any intimidating questions about the past, and, if challenged about her positions in the present, she'll do that "little lady" act (like the upset when Lazio handed her a paper and 'invaded her space'). She's a moving target. She would win the nomination in either 2004 or 2008, whatever she wants--but lose to W. Bush in 2004. 2008--she'd probably win.

[jlogajan]

She'd have to face neutral-to-hostile audiences, and she'd never survive.

It is an expectations game. As long as conservatives (and even liberals) say that she'll choke in real debates, etc -- all she has to do is look half-good and she'll win by beating expectations.

[The Great RJ]

I don't think Hillary's shrill and strident campaign style would stand a chance against Geogre W. Unless the economy tanks or some other disaster occurs I don't think any Democrat presidential candidate will win in 2004.

Hillary would be better off waiting to 2008 and by then she will be better known and the obvious front runner. I also see Dean having a win in both Iowa and New Hampshire making it more difficult for Hillary to just step into the nomination.

[RoughDobermann]

By then it may be too late, not for her but for her party

I agree. Have you seen the size of her butt recently? Way to late to that monster back in shape...

[daviddennis]

Bartley believes that competition between two parties is essential to a Democratic society. In other words, if Republicans are the only party with sensible views, then we won't have debate anymore, and that would make our whole system ossified and corrupt.

I think he has a point.

Unfortunately, I don't think there are any Democrats who can take this idea and run with it. They are too lost in their "Bush lost the last election" mantra. I think they're going to have to lose a few more times before they get it.

I don't see Hillary Clinton helping much in this regard. For one thing, her negatives are way too high. For another thing, I think her beliefs are considerably less mainstream than her husband's.

D

[Yaelle]

She and her sleezy "husband" have avoided ALL such audiences for over 10 YEARS, and therefore have never had to be forced to try to answer questions like "Who killed Vince Foster",

She thinks she's got that one figured out, too. Picture her most phony, disarming, sleazy smile, and all of her energy from cankles on up put into lowering and softening her shrill voice to sound as sweet as the Grinch to Cindy Lou Who, and hear her response: "Why, I covered all that in my book. There is no need to go through all that again." Seriously, that is what she will say if anyone asks anything she doesn't like.

[Cyber Liberty]

I can't see her for a MINUTE facing those questions with anything other than a blank face and a bunch of "I can't remember"s.

I can't see that for a moment, either. But, I think it's because she'll *never* be asked them in the first place. Our media's profoundly lacking in skepticism when it comes to Mrs. Bitch.

[newgeezer]

Unless the economy tanks

Technically, the economy doesn't have to tank. The people just need to be convinced that it is tanked or will tank. After all, that's how Clinton won in '92.

[tjg]

"She appears only with idiot puppets like Bahbwa Wawa and David Letterman who sit there like jerks while she pulls their strings."

It worked when she ran for Senate. Everybody said it wouldn't, but it did.