Hillary's Reckless and Cynical Game

[im10ashus]

by RJ Eskow

<snip>

Holy War on the United States, version 2.0

There are those who will say that the Holy War has already begun. Make no mistake - you ain't seen nothin' yet. An attack on Iran will confirm to millions more that the United States of Christianity is engaging in a redneck jihad against Islam. It'll be Christian vs. Muslim Fundamentalists, with the rest of us as collateral damage.

Sy Hersh quotes a recent Bush statement ("I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally Israel") that is arguably the most diplomatically inept statement on recent record - not because we shouldn't be prepared to defend Israel, but because the Arab world will take it as evidence that the real purpose for any attack on Iran is to act as an aggressive military force for Israeli tactical interests.

<snip>

Enter Hillary

But Hillary wants to be President. And she wants to do it by running to the right of the Republicans on national defense and other issues. Why? Because she clings to the naïve belief that her husband won because he was a centrist - when the fact is he won because he's a great politician. (If right-leaning Democrats are such a great idea, why wasn't Scoop Jackson ever President?)

And if Bill really is her chief advisor, then he's proving that, as great a campaigner as he was, he's equally lousy as a political consultant. (Remember his advice to Kerry - thankfully not taken - that Kerry endorse the anti-gay-marriage referendums being promoted in 2004?) Whoever's guiding Hillary these days is giving her advice that makes for poor politics and poor policy. In effect she's running against her own base while inflaming passions in a powder-keg situation.

<snip>

"Sanctions" as a Code Word

In January Hillary urged UN sanctions against Iran and said: "I believe we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines."

Many of us agree with the statement about negotiations (although note the pandering and emotionally charged use of 'outsourcing,' twice. Somebody tell her speechwriters what 'jumping the shark' means, and that this phrase has done it.) The US should have been talking directly to Iran all along, Clawson notwithstanding. But get this: after slamming Bush for not negotiating with Iran, Hillary doesn't propose negotiations.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/hillarys-reckless-and-cy_b_18984.html

EDIT: COPYRIGHT--PLEASE POST ONLY FOUR OR FIVE
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE PER
DU COPYRIGHT RULES.

[saltpoint]

1. One sensible response to Senator Clinton's stance on this and other

issues would be for as many of those who differ with her to make a more deliberate, focused commitment to another candidate.

The caucuses and primaries, especially the very early ones, will determine fundraising success and, sometimes, poll success -- the private and public forces that drive campaigns.

I'm encouraged by the energy a lot of Connecticut Democrats are showing with their support of Ned Lamont. To me, that's a perfect and powerful response to Joe Lieberman's complicit cheerleading of the Bush administration on Iraq. And for all we know, it may propel Lamont, who seems very qualified and impressive, into the U.S. Senate.

I've posted on DU before that I do not believe Senator Clinton will be the nominee. I'm not saying she isn't intelligent, capable, and well-connected. I'm saying I think other Democratic candidates have a broader and deeper ability to inspire meaningful reform, and I believe that will be apparent after the Iowa caucuses.

At this point (yes, it's still early), I believe she will finish well back in the pack in Iowa, behind Clark, Feingold, Edwards, and possibly Warner. And that's not even factoring in Kerry and Gore if they decide to jump in.

[im10ashus]

2. I forget Joe Lieberman is still a Democrat.

:-)

I hear more and more here in NYC people talking about how Hillary is playing too the right and it pisses them off. The 2006 Senate race will be interesting here in New York.

[saltpoint]

7. I love New York politics from the word 'Go,' and go back a ways with

NYC politics particularly -- a volunteer for Bella Abzug in her primary contest with Moynahan and a couple campaigns of Mario Cuomo, my champion liberal Democrat.

I don't see the Republicans fielding any big names against her, and her war chest is hefty. I think she wins by at least 60-65% in New York, carrying several upstate counties handily. The GOP is clearly not about to waste a lot of cash trying to unseat her.

But I don't think she translates as well to the national stage. Again, she could fool me. I'm frequently way off on would-be candidacies, but I'm not seeing her placing ahead of many other Democratic candidates in those caucuses.

[pretzel4gore]

14. she's not bound by any of that rightwing crap.....

bush has made politics so utterly venal a quick witted liberal would know to disarm '08 opposition while it's still in vitro while assuming the left democratic voter would sorta know that the woman who 1st talked publicly about the 'vast rightwing conspiracy' is pandering to dummies (which the leftdems surely are not) and thus not too worried about the foolishness staged for the slack jawed ubermen....we must remember that the 'vast rightwing conspiracy' is in the drivers seat now, sort of, and any proven leftdem can nudge wink hisher supporters (which, btw drives the rightwing nuts!)...Hillary saw what happened to Bill (anyone who hasn't should check out 'The Hunting of the President' by Conason and Lyons to get a shiver of what the Clintons went through, while they the most powerful people on earth!) and undoubtedly knows what the gopigs are capable of; she'll play along unril they are pried off the levers of power. Like many, i do not understand why the dems are so sensitive to the republican'ts, or why Hillary etc have to speak when such enormous issues such as nuking Iran are tossed about like the USA is a child's sandbox, ruled by a runny nosed bully.....i doubt we'll ever be told why, and events will bury the question sooner then later

[saltpoint]

21. I think the Clintons did go through a hellfire of scorn from the Right

and I think that most GOP voters will never trust Sen. Clinton after hating her and her husband for so long, even if their hatred waswildly misdirected.

In New York, I feel that the GOP knows Senator Clinton is probably unbeatable and that her winning percentage in the Senate race is going to be very high, and that they've essentially got no one who can stop her from winning re-election and using the big vote total to launch an 08 presidential campaign.

For my part, I'm just not seeing that she gets much farther than Iowa or New Hampshire, or one or two of the other early primaries.

She's the well-connected, well-funded media favorite right now, but I think the Iowa living rooms will give other Democrats more star power.

[Iowa]

38. You can count on this Iowa living room to back another horse...

I personally do not know a single person who believes she would be a good nominee. Not one. But right now I'm more interested in 2006.

[Stephanie]

8. We have an alternative. My candidate, Jonathan Tasini

Jonathan Tasini is a progressive, anti-war Democrat. His background is in the labor movement. His hero is Paul Wellstone. What more need I say?

www.tasinifornewyork.org

[im10ashus]

11. He's the best choice as far as I can see.

Given what we have now, which is a bunch of corporate whores who will say anything to get a vote. Tasini speaks to me on every issue - most importantly the Iraq War and Marriage Equality. I'd like to see him get on the ballot in June.

[saltpoint]

15. Hi, Stephanie. And thanks for the link. I'll read up on Jonathan

Tasini.

But you've got the spirit of it just right. A stronger-than-expected showing by a candidate like that would be a sobering development for Sen. Clinton's presidential ambitions.

[Stephanie]

16. she doesn't feel obliged to represent New Yorkers like me

She's too busy courting the "middle." I wish someone would inform her that the "middle" is against the war!

[saltpoint]

23. Keep us posted on Jonathan Tasini. Sounds to me like a damned

thoughtful soul.

[Stephanie]

28. He truly is

He posts at Huffington Post - check him out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-tasini/

[Notoverit]

35. he has my primary vote. But I'm not optimistic.

After seing how the media made Gifford invisible iin the mayoral race - and before that Clark in the presidential, a progressive candidate will be hard to see. Unless he energizes an amazing grassroots effort...

[msgadget]

45. Yes, we need to advance his name here more often

:applause:

[LisaM]

3. That article is correct that Bill won because of who he is

NOT because he is a centrist. I'm glad that the author stated this so clearly because it's a point that I've been trying to articulate in my mind for a while.

[msgadget]

47. I was also glad to see that, Lisa

Bill is the ultimate politician. I saw him the other day and though I loathe some of the policies that came to pass under his adminstration he never fails to capture my attention. I started off mumbling under my breath (Defense of Marriage Act, Don't Ask/Don't Tell, NAFTA, WTO...) but in no time I was nodding my head in agreement and if he had been running for something that day I'd probably have pulled the lever for him. He's gifted as few are.

[WI_DEM]

4. Why doesn't she forget about being president and instead try

and be the best Senator she can be? I'm sorry, I know some of you disagree but if she is nominated she will lose and probably by a sizeable margin. She comes in with huge negatives. She doesn't have the political empathy of her husband and ability to motivate the way he does. She is a very bright and talented person, but she is putting everything into trying to be president.

[LittleClarkie]

6. I think she, like Dean, will only be the frontrunner until someone casts a

vote.

She's being foisted upon us as inevitable, but I'm thinking that will not pan out.

[bee]

9. one major difference though

The media hung Dean in '04.... ala the scream. Hillary just hangs herself. Nonetheless, I dont personally know a single person who wants to vote for her. So Im thinking your assessment is correct.

[TreasonousBastard]

36. But, the media made him, too...

unlike the Senator from NY who spent 8 years as a contoversial First Lady, nobody would have had the slightest idea who Dean was without the media talking about him.

Clinton is the media darling for the moment only because right now there is absolutely nothing else to talk about in '08 but her.

[Pharaoh]

5. K&R

Does any one at DU actually support this woman?

[Donna Zen]

10. There's about 5 people who vote Hillary in DU polls

But there is no getting around the leverage that Clintons control within the Dem. machine. In the first quater of 2006 she raised 6 million. And I hear that the Clinton's are working the Dem. purse strings...hard.

[Stephanie]

12. Hi Donna!

long time no see! :hi:

[Donna Zen]

18. Hi wonderful Stephanie!

I'm still around. How frigging long do we have to watch this go on? Ahhhh....I remember when we thought we had them. Then we thought we had them again. I don't think I'm worn out, but my eyes have glazed over.

And then there's Diebold.

We've gone from protesting a stolen election to talking about nuking someone. What's that tell you?

edit: just a reminder: everything will be fine when they issue the NERC.:rofl:

[Stephanie]

22. I never cease to be amazed

Just when we thought it couldn't get any worse! Remember when we were at tabletalk and our biggest concern was Volusia County?

I am coming to visit you someday. I was just informed that Manhattan is due for a catastrophic hurricane too! Who knew????

[Donna Zen]

25. I still have an extra furnished house

Did you catch my note about the NERC? Oh...yeah, the day we rolled out the reasons to reject the Florida delegates, hey, I was sure it was over. Well, Moore noticed anyway. Was it Sterling that put up the separate website after we finished that jewel?

[Stephanie]

29. Oh god it's all a blur.

You have an extra HOUSE? I'm on the way.

[Donna Zen]

30. You're on

How's Dennis? I noted that Roxanne was in a spot of trouble. Oh, and I guess TAPPA is gone. Ah...should this be taken to a PM? Or would it be enough to add that I'm not a fan of your junior senator...or your senior senator either. But then I have two republicans representing me, so talk's cheap.

[Stephanie]

31. I am busy campaigning AGAINST the junior senator

I've had enough of her.

I don't have contact with the TAPANs any more, except that brad & zan & mrs. p post here. Is it gone? if there is gossip you will have to PM me. Oh and I see MCM regularly. He's very well.

[chicofaraby]

13. Hillary Clinton voted for the war.

She will never get my vote.

I am never voting for another "centrist" Democrat. John Kerry cured me of that.

[Stephanie]

17. At least Kerry will admit that it was a terrible mistake

[chicofaraby]

24. True enough

Kerry at least admits he was wrong.

But the Democrats need to forget about winning by stealing votes from the GOP. The votes to win are the non-voters. Motivate the non-voters and you WILL win election. Republican-lite isn't what the non-voters want. They could vote for that anytime. Give them some real meat from the left and they will respond.

[The Magistrate]

63. What Earthly Reason Do You Have, Sir

For supposing people who do not vote routinely now are only waiting for "real meat from the left" to stream to the polls in hordes?

Polling data over the years on the subject suggests that the views of those who do not vote are indistinguishable from the views of those who do. The leading reason people do not vote is that they feel the thing is in competent enough hands regardless of who wins, and that therefore they do not need to bother over it.

Supposing that those who are silent agree with you whole-heartedly is an easy enough view to slip into, but there is no real basis for it at all.

[umtalal]

19. Me too. Never a 'centrist' anything. Kerry sold me a bag of rotten fruit.

No more. Won't, won't, won't for anyone who thought war was a solution.

Thank you for stating it so adroitly chicofaraby.

[chicofaraby]

26. Gee golly

Thanks.

(digging toe in sand, looking abashed)



uhh, "adroit" is good, right?

:blush:

[umtalal]

32. Yup, adroit is good. LOL

:patriot:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. Thank GOD There Aren't Any Republicans Out There That Should Be Bashed.

Thank God there's no republicans to complain about, or we wouldn't have alllllll the nothing-else-better-to-do time in which to just use it to bash our own... ...Seriously, thank God there aren't more important things going on in the other party to talk about. It's so nice that everything in the country is running so smoothly due to the right wing controlling it that we have nothing else to do but simply complain about ourselves. Thank god there aren't any articles that can be written on the things the republicans are doing. I mean, if there were, if there was actually stuff republicans were doing wrong, we'd have to actually read and write articles on them instead of *gasp* our own democrats!

Way to go Eskow!
:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[Stephanie]

27. Right, never mind the collaborators

Never mind the Democrats who ENABLE the Republicans to loot this country, start illegal, immoral wars, destroy our environment, destroy our Constitution, mever mind those who refuse to STAND UP in the face of OUTRAGEOUS crimes and lies. We should support everyone who has a (D) by their name, regardless of their stands on the issues, regardless of ther collaboration with the neocons.

[im10ashus]

33. Thank GOD we don't give every candidate a free pass.

Especially when they are pro-war.

[iconoclastNYC]

54. Bad Democrats are acceptable because Republicans are worse?

What kind of child-like logic is that?

I want a party I can be proud of that and takes principled leadership.

Hillary fails the test.

[im10ashus]

57. Thank you, iconoclastNYC!

I think it would be healthy to get the democrats back to the base. No more DINO's.

[AtomicKitten]

34. I'm content to let Hillary by the straw-woman

for everyone until Al Gore declares his intent to run.

I'll leave the Hillary-bashing to the GOP who do a splendid job already and to New Yorkers who have a stake in her Senate seat.

I've got my hands full here in California ousting Lumpy Schwarzenegger.

[Stephanie]

37. Al's my man!

He's the only one. Nobody else.

[Pharaoh]

40. your right Al is the guy

But feingold is the best bet to actually run.........

but if we can convince al to run........it would be spectacular!

[im10ashus]

41. That would be a DREAM ticket for me.

Gore/Feingold.

[im10ashus]

64. My favorite sight this past year, 2005, was in the Castro on Halloween.

We were there visiting friends and a group of people dragged in a big blow up Hulk-like thing that was Ahnold and placed it in the middle of the street and beheaded it. Quite the statement I thought. That was right before your vote there in California, I believe. That crazy resolution vote. Anyway, thought I'd share.

;-)

[Catfight]

39. Bill won because of Ross Perot. Hillary is the great politician. nt

[stepnw1f]

42. Meanwhile we are Supposed to Be Fighting the GOP

This is fucking getting ridiculous. I don't much care for Hillary but this is just stupid politics.

[Pharaoh]

43. So you would support lieberman?

Or Zell Miller just cause they have a D after their name?

[stepnw1f]

44. That's Not the Point I Was Making (nt)

[Pharaoh]

46. I would Be open to H clinton

But I want a Leader.......someone to Lead the party......
the time for keeping powder dry is long past gone, The Barbarians are at the gate and crashing through! Time to speak up and lead or get out of the way!!!!!!!!

[stepnw1f]

48. I'll PM You... (nt)

[im10ashus]

49. How is this stupid politics?

Hillary is turning into a Republican before our very eyes and we are supposed to say and do nothing? I am sorry, but playing small has never been my idea of good politics, and Hillary wants us to allow her to play to the right.

[stepnw1f]

50. Infighting is Stupid Politics

especially right before an election.

[im10ashus]

51. First off, it's not "right before" the election.

The Senate race isn't until November here in NY. Second, infighting in politics is sometimes necessary when someone is leaning right of center.

[stepnw1f]

53. sometimes it is (nt)

[im10ashus]

55. Sometimes is not always.

Look, there is nothing I wouldn't do to win back control of Congress and the White House. BUT, I will take the hits for wanting to question their stance during a primary or senate race. It's only fair that they are questioned on their voting record and public statements. Look at this thread. There are a lot of people who are fed up with Hillary. Do you suggest we just shut the hell up and give her a free pass?

[iconoclastNYC]

56. Why do you hate democracy?

You want us to run the DNC like the Communist party in Russia....no dissent.... no primaries.... higher ups in DC can just pick all our candidates for us. This is what you want?

I'm shocked by how many people on DU hate democracy.

[stepnw1f]

61. Nice Try at Reiterating What I Said

That was way over the top baiting... have a nice day.

[iconoclastNYC]

62. Primaries are infighting.

And they usually comes before elections.

That's what you said. You hate Democracy. Just own up to it.

[iconoclastNYC]

52. I don't know a single democrat who isn't dissapointed by her

If you know the first thing about her stance on the war you know that she'd lose just the same way Kerry did.

She doesn't stand for anything, she's poll driven, she's more concerned with the 1% of voters who are "centrist" undecides. She's the ULTIMATE D.C. insider. She'd fire up the GOP base like nobody could and the base of our party is uninterested in her.

She's the medias pick because it'd be a fun campaign to cover. That's the only reason why she's the front runner.

[Strawman]

58. I liked this phrase...

"Her position is buzzword driven and, as a result, logically incoherent."

Buzzword driven, logically incoherent, and cynical. That pretty much sums up Democratic elites in the political wilderness.

We need to let go of the illusion that we can be all things to all people.

[im10ashus]

59. That is the one part of the article that stuck out for me too.

How many election cycles can we go through before the DLC takes over the Democratic Party?

[Strawman]

60. it's an authenticity problem that is bigger than the DLC

in 1992, Clinton was DLC and authentic at the same time. Before him came Dukakis and Mondale. They were both like a stale bag of chips.

Now the DLC is that stale bag of chips. It's like a historical cycle, the DLC moment has passed but they still hold alot of power. The DLC cadre of experts indulge in a certain rhetorical techniques for their own sake. They are convinced that "this is how you win." They're trying to hold the 1990's Clinton electoral coalition (which was shaky to begin with) together with empty cliches. And they still win enough that they still believe it because that coalition still has the Democratic base and still has adherents beyond the base. Just like there are still people walking around with "Rachel" haircuts. I don't believe one does the party any favors by shutting up and going along in this situation. People aren't going to vote for the reification of technique. Doing exactly what Clinton did in the 1990's won't make the same gut level connections with the voters today.

[suziedemocrat]

65. I half way think she is in cahoots with the "evil ones."

She and her husband just seem too buddy-buddy with the wrong people. ????????