"When you're attacked, you have to deck your opponents"

[politicasista]

:grr:

Clinton Begins Her Run In Earnest
Iowa 'Town Hall' Draws a Crowd

By Anne E. Kornblut and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, January 28, 2007; Page A01

DES MOINES, Jan. 27 -- Bursting onto the campaign trail for the first time here on Saturday, Democratic New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton quickly confronted two looming questions about her presidential candidacy: whether voters are ready to elect a woman to the White House and how aggressively she would respond to Republican attacks if she were her party's nominee.

In an auditorium packed with more than 1,000 people -- many of them women -- Clinton stood alone at center stage, her arms outstretched, as she encouraged Iowans to help her win the presidency. "I'm running for president, and I'm in it to win it," she said to a burst of applause

Clinton acknowledged that the campaign ahead might become brutal, particularly if she is picked as the Democratic nominee. She noted that she had overcome doubters who had predicted that she could not win a Senate seat in New York. And in response to a question about the lessons she has learned from Massachusetts Sen. John F. Kerry's loss to President Bush in 2004, Clinton promised to respond aggressively when attacked.

"When you're attacked, you have to deck your opponents," she said, after a more tepid initial response. She added: "I want to run a positive, issue-oriented, visionary campaign. But you can count on me to stand my ground and fight back."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012700802.html

[wisteria]

1. Sorry, but screw her.

She knows damn well he fought back and when he fought back in October she stabbed him in the back. She is slime.

[_dynamicdems]

2. She's a horses ass if she thinks this is a smart strategy.

The LAST thing Hillary Clinton should do is go on the attack. The public perception of her as a shrew will only be strengthened. This is a HUGE mistake. She's not John Kerry and despite hindsight about what people think might have worked for John Kerry in 2004, it's not going to work for Hillary Clinton in 2008. There is still sexism in this country and people are turned off by a harsh, shrill woman. And Hillary is already perceived this way. The exact opposite strategy would be best for Hillary. She needs to show people she's not an aggressive and pugilistic bitch. If ever there was a candidate that needed to take the high road, it's Hillary Clinton. Man oh man, this is going to be a slaughter

Don't get me wrong, she deserves whatever she gets after throwing Kerry under the bus, but you really have to wonder about her campaign advisers. She seems to be giving people reasons to NOT vote for her rather than TO vote for her.

[wisteria]

3. I said that before, her camp is coming out and swinging at everything.

Remember the overkill when Edwards spoke about congress as a whole and Hillary took it to mean her? She is looking too punchy. That is what happens when you spread lies about someone else. You have to keep defending that lie and in this case it is showing she is tougher than Kerry because her people have been using this suggestion of a weak Kerry campaign to knock him down.

Good points.

[politicasista]

4. And unfortunately, that's another reason

why people want her and Bill in the WH. They think the Clintons are the ones that know how to fight back, and taught others how to do so.

I know, because that's the first question Tom Joyner asked JK back in August, 2004 was why wasn't he fighting back against the Bush attack machine. (no audio or transcript :() Kerry responded by saying that he WAS fighting back and "and that he wasn't going to let someone with five deferments define security for him."

I think that was also the same time that Bill appeared on Letterman and talked about JK missing opportunities to "close the deal."


I do agree with the both of you.

[karynnj]

5. It's interesting putting Kerry's and Clinton's 2004 actions together

Looking at this, I can't figure out in retrospect, how Kerry could have dealtwith this.

Bill Clinton was the Democrat's biggest voice. Yet he personally led his minions in stating (or suggesting at other times) that Kerry wasn't good enough. Other than Eisenhower, who answered a question on Nixon's VP accomplishments with a comment that he had to think about it, I have NEVER seen any former President do this do his party's contender - ever. What the hell was he doing negatively critiqing Kerry's campaign when, genius that he is using lanuage, he could have turned the question to bring up good things about Kerry.

The best argument I have against the Clintons is that they were willing to let Bush have 4 more years. If Clinton really is the political genius he is credited with being AND he cared for his country and the soldiers as much in a year as Kerry does in a minute, he would have been cheerleading for Kerry and telling his sleasy minions to cut the ABB crap and make the case for Kerry. Choosing personal political gain over the consequences of this last Bush term is the action of a truly amoral degenerate person.

Coming to that conclusion hurts because I remember too clearly defending him to a Republican/independent relative, who voted for him in 1992, but be 1996 was too replussed to do so. It hurts, because part of the reason the Democratic party itself was so tainted by Clinton was most of us defended him when we should have held to our own principles. In this, the woman's movement was likely the most guilty.

[citizensoldierlou]

6. Duck or Deck?

She's already proving her tactic is to ignore anything that takes her out of the safe zone. I'm still amazed more people aren't talking about how she refused to answer the one question she got on Iraq - and it was from a Vet for God's sake. She answered with a boast about her hubby's funding of the VA, instead of the critical need for better mental health funding for the vets coming back with PTSD.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0107/2493.html


So if she's so afraid of a pretty benign question on the escalation that she ducks it, can we really expect her to deck anybody.

[karynnj]

10. That is really stupid

It's a benign question and with Kerry out of the race the easy answer is that he was able last November to get some (though not near what he said was needed) funding for centers that deal with PTSD. (This was what he spoke about at the Hidden Wounds premiere.) All she would have to have done is say she would support closer to the amount Kerry wanted.

I had thought that it would likely be the vets in Iowa who, as in 2004, would lead the turn to Kerry in 2008. Hillary does not seem to have the real connection that he does, nor do the others. This non-answer was stupid.

I also don't see where she has fought anything in 5 years. She, unlike Kerry, has the party and media to fight for her.

[citizensoldierlou]

14. It was total avoidance

The question was about the troop escalation, and she answered about medical care:

"A man, who identified himself as a Gulf War vet, asked the New York senator at a town meeting in a high school gym here Saturday if the surge of new troops to Iraq “was going to be enough?”

Instead of answering, Hillary (as she is officially called by her campaign) said, “Thanks so much for your service” and then talked about how she visits military hospitals and believes America needs to provide good medical care for its veterans."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0107/2493.html

You cannot say on the one hand that this woman is so smart and sharp at politics, yet have me believe she didn't understand a direct question about a deadly war. Sorry, she's a liar and this was just another form of a lie by omission.

[TayTay]

11. There were protestors in Iowa yesterday

And there are going to start to be a lot more protestors. Hillary is going to be a big, big target because she is unable to articulate anything on Iraq. Her appearances in Committee and on TV are so bland. That is gonna wear thin real fast.

She is revealing her own flaws. One of them is this inability to stand for anything beyond, Mom, apple pie and motherhood. (Quite literally in the case of the last one. Yesterday, one of her points was that she will be a good candidate because she is a Mom. OMG!)

What is Hillary for? Ah, universal health care (without any details on who gets covered or how it gets paid for. ) She is for doing something in Iraq. (What exactly? No one knows. But she strongly wants to do something in Iraq. Something, ahm, nearly, possibly, and maybe a bit on the bold side, unless polls show that's not a good idea, in which case, she will figure out a way to make it appear that she is doing something nearly bold while really just waiting events out.)

And so it goes. No guts, no real positions on anything and no challenges.

[ginnyinWI]

13. Her political strategies look a lot like *'s.

Say whatever it takes to win. Do everything in the light of its political advantage. This is the LAST thing America needs right now.

[sandnsea]

20. The mom thing - focus grouped

I can't even begin to remember where I read that, but it was in an article that referred to Klobuchar I think, and Nancy Pelosi. Anyway, people liked when women talked about being a mom. I guess people don't want the stereotypical career bitch so women counter that with blather about being a mom. I think it's perfect for Nancy Pelosi. I love that the right tried to label her as a loony liberal and she turns out to be this nice Italian Catholic grandma. Perfect. But the President?? Uh uh. No way. People want competence and integrity and reassurance. I think that might be part of the problem in the Democratic Party, they don't get the difference between what people want in their local rep and their President.

[wisteria]

17. The Clinton's don't care about other lives. This is the man who allowed a mentally

retarded man go to his death because Clinton didn't want to look weak on criminals. The poor man didn't even know what they were going to do to him. When he ate his last dinner and left the dessert, they asked him if he wanted it and he answered he WAS GOING TO SAVE IT FOR LATER.
The Clinton's sold their souls a long time ago. Now as Bill gets older, he is trying to make amends and buy a place in haven by doing a few good deeds. I personally hope they both rot in hell.

[MBS]

22. I hadn't heard that story-uggh n/t

[blm]

15. BULLSHIT - if they attacked so well, then how DD a network of SMEARERS become so strong

under Clinton's watch?

Did he bat them down during his term? Did he counter them at ANY TIME after? He waited FIVE FOCKING YEARS before he said one word about the "Clinton to blame for 9-11 attack". Or the Dems are weak on terror meme.

The RW lie machine grew and became STRONGER for the very reason that Clointon NEVER batted them down effectively. If he had they wouldn't have been dominating the airwaves and the bestseller lists for the last 8 years.

[citizensoldierlou]

18. A-effin-Men

While the Clintons were getting cozy to the Bushes, the rest of us were out here enduring withering attacks on our patriotism and combating RW lies about this horrible war.

They stood silent while the RW attack machine whored out the victims of 9-11 in the most disgusting way imaginable, in order to scare the people into going along with their neo-con agenda.

Silent.

:grr:

[politicasista]

24. True

No one never wants to answer that question. Eventually Tom and the some of the urban media warmed up to Kerry, but without criticism.

At the end of that interview, Tom did ask him how was his "African-American" wife aka Teresa doing after she was briefly ill, and Kerry told him that she was feeling fine and was out on the trail the next day and was really proud of her.:) (sigh)

[wisteria]

16. It is wise to pick your fights. Coming out and challanging everyting makes

it look like you are constantly on the defensive. Why would they have to fight everything?

[MH1]

9. Her campaign strategy is to buy the media and thus the needed votes.

And, it might work.

(Crappy attitude to have, I know, but that's where my head is now about the political process in this country.)

[wisteria]

19. Yep, she is attempting to buy her way into the White House. n/t

[Inuca]

23. 100% agree

Still, it is kind of funny to see how writing about her makes so many of us forget our lady-like manners :-). I realize I am not objective, but for the time being at least seeing and hearing her on TV triggers the same snickering disgust as when I see Bush.

[cadmium]

7. my recollection of the past Clinton campaigns

were that in 1992 they did issue boiler plate rapid responses but not real counter attacks. Clinton ran a positive campaign. Ross Perot did most of the Bush attacking. Ross Perot took down GHWBush not so much in vote tallies but in being an attack dog on the campaign trail

The campaign against Bob Dole was actually pretty weak--considering people were happy with Clinton/Gore and Dole was blase'

People like to remember the Clinton team as fighters--an image they perpetuate but I dont' take the image for granted.

[TayTay]

8. That campaign was a mess

Clinton had one problem after another. There were the 'bimbo eruptions' that nearly derailed his candidacy. There was the letter that surfaced that showed Clinton sought out special help to get out of serving in Vietnam. That campaign was always on the verge of falling apart, at least until April, when Tsongas dropped out and Clinton pretty much had the nomination. Even then, Clinton got little to no respect for a great deal of that summer. (I remember him going on Arsenio Hall and playing the sax. Ah, he had to. He was getting little press at that time, all the media oxygen was being sucked up by Perot.)

Remember, the Clinton campaign was so bad that when they came in 2nd in NH, that was viewed as a big victory. (That campaign won on luck and because Bush41 was so deeply unpopular and had a terrible economy to deal with.)

[wisteria]

21. Exactly right on all accounts. It is amazing how our party has a selective memory

of events when it concerns the Clinton's.

[karynnj]

25. If Perot wouldn't have fallen apart and appeared to be crazy,

Clinton would have lost. People have said the that from exit polls, the people who voted for Perot who said they would still have voted, chose Bush and Clinton about 50/50. This ignores those who decided against Bush then went to Clinton and stayed - even when the now labelled loony Perot returned.

Bush 1 in spring 1992 was more than 10 points lower in approval rating than W was at a comparable time - the country was not at war and as you said Bush was very unpopular - only recently has his son become more unpopular.

Not to menation it is way easier to prepare for attacks when you know what you did wrong. Kerry had no reason to think an attack on his service would be credible.

[ginnyinWI]

12. I'd say to her: "Just you wait."

If she means "decking" her Democratic opponents, then all I can say is that she's tearing down her own party and has NO class.

If she means "decking" her Repub opponent, Kerry said some similar things (although in a more classy way) during his primary period. But the GOP slime machine was able to do its dirty work anyway. Not that I think the swift-boating did him in. I think it was the war--people thinking that they needed to give * a chance to finish his war--that it might be dangerous to change commander-in-chief. I heard this over and over again in Wisconsin. As if the new guy wouldn't know what was going on! Now that makes my head hurt!

But back to Billary: they think they have been through this before and can handle it. I say that it's different out there now. The sharks have many more teeth.

[MarjorieG]

26. They learned from 2004, but didn't help get us the win.

I'm convinced they, and the Dem party they still control, did not do enough to refute or hit back. Took the lessons, and gave us Bush for another four years.

[MBS]

27. I agree completely

Integrity is not at exactly a word that leaps to mind when describing this crew

[ginnyinWI]

28. I watched part of her appearance on Road to the WH--

I fast-forwarded to listen to bits here and there and get a flavor. My take is that she is a big phoney. She comes off that way, anyway. She talked "at" the people, not to them, and this was especially evident when answering questions. It was all about her big "performance" portraying a smart, caring person who was tough. Huh.

I also looked closely at the audience reaction. Mostly they were bored. Some yawned, others sat with no expressions, except in response to a few of the "jokes". I know Iowa polls don't favor her right now, so maybe this is further evidence that she won't do very well.