Recently in Hillary Clinton Category
Starting late, Hillary hasn't left her house yet. Was supposed to start five minutes ago...
I'll be watching it and commenting. More later.
Pre-concession thoughts: How much fodder will she provide today for GOP ads? After attacking Obama for months for his inexperience and other traits, she now has to support the Messiah. Her best bet would be to faint as if she were at one of Barack's rallies, nothing quotable left over and the media would approve...
12:24PM: Still waiting, talking heads running out of material.
12:26PM: Fox News says she'll leave her house at 12:30...
Chris Wallace suggests the lateness is intentional, Susan Estrich says no...
12:30 - Motorcade has left, I'm surprised they're not showing live video of their progress - otherwise, this entire event has the look and feel of a state funeral.
12:36 - Motorcade has arrived.
12:46 - Hillary on stage only 46 minutes late - wild applause from supporters - show time!
12:50 - "Well, this isn't exactly the party I planned...."
12:55 - She's looking at her notes way too much - my guess is that the late arrival was due to last minute tweaking of the speech.
She's been thanking all her supporters and has broken a record for victim stories in the process - c'mon, Hill, get on with it!
12:56 - Boos when she says to direct energy to Obama!
"I have served with him in the Senate for four years" - Um, no, you haven't.
She looked angry with the crowd when they booed....
12:58 - Calling for unity - applause not nearly as loud as before, fewer boos.
1:01 - Throwing a bone to Bill - "Weve only won 3 of last ten elections, the man who won two of those is here today"
1:05 - more boos!
1:06 - "Could a woman be CIC? I think we answered that one" Is she forgetting that this a concession speech?
1:10 - Mentioned "18 million" twice so far, equates a woman being elected President with being "blasted into space". How odd.
1:15 - More thanks to family and staff, crowd a lot happier with this part of speech.
Her delivery during the part where she supported Obama seemed wooden, and her irritation with the crowd showed in her expressions. The last few minutes were much more genuine. I'll be posting video when available.
Oddly, there was little mention of McCain, and the endorsement was much shorter than expected. Overall, not a very convincing effort.
Update: Video (H/T Gateway Pundit)
Update 2: The entire speech:
Are they prepping for an announcement? The headline sure makes it look that way: The era of big Clintons is soon over.
There's been a Clinton running for the White House or living in it for approximately forever. Bill, it could be said, was born to run. Running became Hillary's destiny, too.One quarter of Americans have never known life without a Clinton trying for or having the presidency. Millions have gone from diapers to diplomas in the time of the Clintons.
When Hillary Rodham Clinton finally exits the 2008 Democratic presidential race, she will end a decades-long, power-couple streak of unique political energy, savvy ideas, colossal policy flops and raw ambition dressed in pants suits and briefs, not boxers.
"Every day is an adventure," Bill said cheerfully at the start of it all. And how.
By now, the Clintons have been assigned mystical qualities of perseverance. The notion that the adventure is over is almost beyond comprehension.
"I never quit," she says. "I never give up."
Even in defeat, Hillary Clinton has made history as the first woman favored for a major party presidential nomination — the first with a real shot at the presidency.
Or maybe it's AP's way of telling us that they, like Jimmy Carter, aren't endorsing either Democrat.
Elizabeth Edwards, in an email to Politico on whether she'll endorse a candidate:
"If I say I like chocolate ice cream better than strawberry, it doesn't mean either (1) that I like chocolate or strawberry as much as vanilla or (2) that I dislike strawberry. I say what I mean."
Yep, that clears it up. She goes on:
As for her personal relationships with Clinton and Obama, Edwards wrote, "I like both (or, counting spouses, all four) of these people personally. Do we play Boggle together or go biking together? No, although it would be okay with me if we did. They are interesting, compelling people with many of the same thoughts as I have about the issues that confront us."
Sounds like an invitation to me. Wonder if she'll serve ice cream?
She was campaigning at a whiskey maker, and the article acknowledges that fact. But the accompanying pictures don't help:
I wouldn't be surprised if this gets pick up by the tabloids.
And the Politico article on the subject goes nicely with the image above - "Hillary turns fire on media". Read it all, but here is the thrust of it:
Clinton has long complained that the media have treated her more roughly than Obama. But the campaign began courting a media backlash as a central strategy after her surprisingly narrow win in Indiana and crushing loss in North Carolina, which together were characterized by the press as sealing the Democratic presidential nomination for Obama.Campaign aides were particularly livid at Russert's election night declaration on MSNBC that, "We now know who the Democratic nominee is going to be, and no one is going to dispute it" - even before the network called Indiana for Clinton.
Ironic that for years she's complained that the media existed as a right-wing attack vehicle, only now does she learn the truth. Maybe she should try clinging to... well, you know.
"Women are feeling a lot of sadness, disappointment and some anger as they look back at what happened in this race," said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.And at least part of that anger, Walsh says, is directed at the sexism that some feel seriously harmed the former first lady's candidacy — from T-shirts bearing photos of Clinton and Obama with the slogan "Bros Before Hos" to Hillary Clinton nutcrackers sold in airports.
Question for the feminists - have you tried clinging to guns, god, and xenophobia? It works for the rest of us.
The MSM is going scorched earth on Hillary. As she trounces Obama by a greater than 40 point margin in W. Va., an Obama-smitten media is going where they've never gone before in order to minimize the victory - racism in the Democrat party. From the New York Times, we're treated to this wrap-up on W. Va.:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton won a lopsided victory on Tuesday over Senator Barack Obama in the West Virginia primary, where racial considerations emerged as an unusually salient factor. Mrs. Clinton drew strong support from white, working-class voters, who have spurned Mr. Obama in recent contests.The number of white Democratic voters who said race had influenced their choices on Tuesday was among the highest recorded in voter surveys in the nomination fight. Two in 10 white West Virginia voters said race was an important factor in their votes. More than 8 in 10 who said it factored in their votes backed Mrs. Clinton, according to exit polls.
Besides a few hints at the end, the article doesn't really say why the 80% for whom race was not an important factor voted overwhelmingly for Clinton. You'd think that would be the bigger story - that, for example, 53% of West Virginia voters felt that the Messiah was dishonest, apparently so much so that 8 of 10 of those actually favored the heroine of the Tuzla Dash at the polls.
For another good example, take this article by the Washington Post with the loaded title "Racist Incidents Give Some Obama Campaigners Pause" filled with examples of Obama workers being treated to racism as they courted registered Democrats for the Indiana primary:
Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: "It wasn't pretty." She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn't possibly vote for Obama and concluded: "Hang that darky from a tree!"
You might think the "ugly truths" I reference in the title is that Hillary's base (and by proxy the Democrat party in general) is swimming with racists. Nothing could be further from the truth. (Both parties do have some individuals who are racists, although those of us on the right have argued for years that the Democrat party's policies are racist, as they discourage assimilation into and participation in the American dream.) No, the "ugly truth" is that the media is willing to paint large parts of the population as racist in order to secure the victory of a favored candidate.
Willing, too, is Obama's campaign. All of this is telegraphing Obama's (and the fawning media's) strategy for the fall, as hinted to by Obama's own campaign manager, David Plouffe:
I mean the vast, vast majority of voters who would not vote for Barack Obama in November based on race are probably firmly in John McCain's camp already.
If the Obama camp and the media are willing to go this route in a blue on blue contest, imagine what we'll see in the Fall. In spite of all the pretty rhetoric about new politics and civility, this is starting to shape up as the nastiest Presidential campaign in history.
Mostly funny, except the parts about Obama having ethical standards and not playing the race card, both of which we know aren't true. Especially funny is the part about the superdelegates choosing the candidate and not the people, since it is true. Selected, not elected, folks. Thanks to SNL for rubbing it in for my lefty-lemming friends:
Some folks just can't wait for the non-stop giveaways and entitlements to come from either a Clinton or Obama presidency. This one's clever, though - buy his vote and he'll use the proceeds to buy more votes.
So let the bidding begin:
Just a thought - will he withhold his vote if he doesn't get the 20 mil?
Although Obama wasn't on the ballot, the party that's always demagoguing about voter disenfranchisement has decided to push unearned votes his way in order to have the state's primary voters' will heard:
LANSING, Mich. - Michigan Democratic leaders on Wednesday settled on a plan to give presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton 69 delegates and Barack Obama 59 as a way to get the state's delegates seated at the national convention.
Because Democrats are all about fairness, right?
Added - had trouble finding a Hillary photo worthy of the seething rage and anguish she must be feeling over Michigan's proposal. This will have to do:
Does this count as experience? Considering the left's taste in candidates, though, I have to believe this will likely help her....
Does that mean Bill's name is now Adrian? That's not going to help him get dates...
Nothing really new in stories like this one, but they're still fun to read:
Party fears tight Obama-Clinton finishWASHINGTON - For all their delight in soaring voter registration and strong poll numbers, some Democrats fear the contest between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton might have a nightmarish end, which could wreck a promising election year.
Enjoy.
Turns out Hillary wasn't lying on this one. She actually was involved.
Clinton twice addressed audiences of schoolchildren at Belfast's Musgrave Park, in September 1998 and May 1999. She declared that Protestant and Catholic youths must learn to play together but needed a safe place to do it — and helped plant a tree on the spot where a special cross-community playground would be created. Belfast did have other parks.
There. Don't all of you Hillary supporters feel better? Good. Please don't read any further. The next paragraph is for the rest of us.
Nearly a decade later, Musgrave Park remains as it was: a well-groomed, rather lonely place sandwiched between a hospital and a highway, where adults jog and walk their dogs amid birdsong and spring flowers. The Belfast group touting the "Play for Peace Fund" silently shelved the idea within months although Clinton often referred to the project as an inspiration to a divided world.
So inspired that they ditched the project. She even fails at playground politics.
Update: Welcome Real Clear Politics readers!
A question about the Lewinsky scandal surprised Chelsea Clinton on the campaign trail yesterday:
INDIANAPOLIS - Chelsea Clinton had a quick retort Tuesday when asked whether her mother's credibility had been hurt during the Monica Lewinsky scandal."Wow, you're the first person actually that's ever asked me that question in the, I don't know maybe, 70 college campuses I've now been to, and I do not think that is any of your business," Clinton said during a campaign visit for her mother, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Much as I like Michelle Malkin, I have to disagree with her assessment. There's plenty about Hillary to pick on without asking Chelsea this type of question just to watch her squirm. I'm not saying Michelle's wrong, mind you. It's just one of those lines I would prefer not be crossed.
In the interest of disclosure, though, I should let you know that there was a similar situation in my family (except my parents were not famous and they wound up getting divorced over it). So maybe I'm just unable to see this objectively.
H/T Hot Air (where video is available)
After a week of silence, it seems that Hillary is unwilling to let the Rev. Wright story fade away:
"He would not have been my pastor," Clinton said. "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend."
Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark if she keeps the pressure on.
Obama responded in his customary way - by sending someone else out to do it:
"After originally refusing to play politics with this issue, it's disappointing to see Hillary Clinton's campaign sink to this low in a transparent effort to distract attention away from the story she made up about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. The truth is, Barack Obama has already spoken out against his pastor's offensive comments and addressed the issue of race in America with a deeply personal and uncommonly honest speech."
I wonder - if Obama had not tossed Grandma under the bus, would the speech have been just "personal" instead of "deeply personal"?
By now, most of you are surely aware that Hillary made up the story about dodging sniper fire out of whole cloth. Her campaign offers no reasonable explanation to accompany their characterizations of "misstatement" and "minor blip". Had Hillary ever landed in a dangerous region under hostile fire (or the threat of same), they would have been quick to trot the details out as proof that Hillary simply remembered a detail or two incorrectly but her underlying story was indeed true.
Since that hasn't happened, we're left with the curtain completely pulled back in a way we rarely see when it comes to our politicians. So the blogosphere is having fun with the somewhat threadbare (in this case, anyway) "misspoke" language being utilized by Hillary's campaign. My favorite comes from John Hinderaker at Powerline:
It Lacked the Added Virtue of Being True
Follow the link for video of the CBS report that hammered the stake through Hillary's tale. Adding additional comic interest is that this helps Obama, whose resume is even thinner than Hillary's.
Via AP/Yahoo:
BAGHDAD - A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in Baghdad on Sunday, the military said, pushing the overall American death toll in the five-year war to at least 4,000. The grim milestone came on a day when at least 61 people were killed across the country.
Well, I guess we know what the topic of the week is going to be for the Democrat candidates. Expect more dishonest tripe from both as Obama claims his ignorance-based stance on the war shows better judgment than that of those who actually had access to intel, and watch Hillary spin like a top as she regrets basing her Iraq war vote on facts instead of opinion polls of the moonbat wing of her party. And both will attack each other on which plan for surrender waves the white flag faster and higher.
Lost in all of this will be the troops, some of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom while the left continues to actively undermine the morale and mission of those that remain.
As a military retiree, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the men and women currently serving their country. Your tireless devotion, courage, and professionalism are appreciated.
Erica Jong (author of Fear of Flying), on Huffington Post:
We have two great candidates--one a hard working, never give up eager beaver, and one an inspiring, heart-leapingly brilliant stallion.
A beaver and a stallion? At first I wondered if the article was satire, but considering the overwhelmingly depressing and humorless tone at the Huffington Post and among the left in general...
Here's more:
the sooner they bring the beaver and the stallion together, the better off we'll all be.
and she ends with this:
So let's stop talking about race and gender and let the beaver and the stallion both serve our country--in their own inimitable ways.
With frightening imagery like this, Ms. Jong could have been a top seller of horror novels.
Via Hot Air:
Indeed. In other Obama/Wright news, Mike Huckabee has weighed in on the side of Wright. He thinks we should cut Wright some slack because Wright was just "caught up in the emotion" and lived through racism many years ago. Here's the video:
Of course, Wright wasn't railing against past racism, but current society. If you can't be with the one you blame, then blame the one you're with.
I didn't comment on the Obama speech, I was at work when it was broadcast and many other bloggers said mostly what needed to be said. In short, though, I think the pattern we're seeing emerge from Obama on this subject is fairly clear - a black person can dish out anti-American and racist tripe, even while in an official position of spiritual mentorship where his words are given more credence, and it's forgivable cause it's weighed against all the good that person's done. Besides, it's the fault of white folks who committed acts of racism in the past. It's like there's a special strain of Tourettes Syndrome affecting people of color, they just can't help it. Personal responsibility plays no part in the process. Oh, and it's also ok to teach these beliefs to children.
On the other hand, if you're one of the "rich white people" like Don Imus - then you deserve anything and everything that a vengeful nation can dish out. If your life is completely ruined, so much the better.
Is it wrong for me to feel that this is harmful to people of all races?
Good for a few laughs - check the expressions when they get hit:
Street FightObama and Hillary fight it out in hand-to-hand combat. |
| Play this free game now!! |
Via AP/Yahoo:
ZURICH, Switzerland - Glaciers are shrinking at record rates and many could disappear within decades, the U.N. Environment Program said Sunday.
As far as I'm concerned, they're not disappearing fast enough. This one was spotted recently in Pittsburgh:
Here's a press release today from Sunshine Week, a "non-partisan open government
initiative led by the American Society of Newspaper Editors":
WASHINGTON, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) says she is "committed to restoring open government" by not only mandating more open meetings and release of public documents, but also by nominating "an attorney general who has a proven commitment to open government," according to her response to the Sunshine Week 2008: Sunshine Campaign survey of presidential candidates.
Here's a flashback to March 3:
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - The National Archives said Monday it expects to release Hillary Rodham Clinton's schedules as first lady later this month, but has asked a judge to delay the release of thousands of her telephone logs for one to two years.
Hmm. Back to today's press release, here's a quote from Senator Clinton:
"I believe in an open, transparent government that is accountable to the people," Clinton wrote. "Excessive government secrecy harms democratic governance and can weaken our system of checks and balances by shielding officials from oversight and inviting misconduct or error."To me, openness and accountability are not platitudes -- they are essential elements of our democracy," she added.
Here's another flashback, this time to March 8:
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - The Clinton Presidential Library withheld more than a thousand pages about clemency the former president granted during his last days in office — including a pardon to fugitive financier Marc Rich — from a batch of documents recently released to the public.
Sunshine Week has to be on the payroll - no genuine organization aiming for open government would believe this tripe.
Comes a prominent civil rights figure joking about Bill Clinton's prowess with black women:
"He's probably gone with more black women than Barack," Young said of former President Clinton, drawing laughter from a live television audience. Young, 75, was quick to follow his comment on Bill Clinton with the disclaimer, "I'm clowning."
Dr. Melissa has much more, go read the whole thing. She's right when she says "And Hillary doesn't need this kind of help." Because all of this trashy and racist talk takes away from discussing Hillary's resolute policy stances, the depth of her experience, or the warmth of her personality, um... no, wait - I guess this is all due to Hillary's supporters having too much time on their hands.
Via Right Wing News, where if John got crappy bloggers like me to fill in on the weekends instead of the bunch he's been using, I'd be talking about his weekday posts instead. ;)
As both of my regular readers know, I scour though press releases in search of the interesting and newsworthy so that you don't have to. Normally, they're pretty dry and matter-of-fact - statements on policy, text of speeches, announcements of events, etc.
Sometimes, though, the writers of PRs get their literary juices flowing and serve up something, well, more. Case in point is a summary of a campaign stop by Dennis Kucinich yesterday, titled "Kucinich 'Connects' with Everyday Citizens at Massive Iowa Presidential Forum":
One especially poignant moment dramatically reflected the affinity between the coalition's populist agenda and Kucinich's deep involvement in those same issues. A community leader from Iowa recounted the events of Dec. 12, 2006, when federal immigration authorities raided a plant in search of undocumented immigrants. Among those detained and exiled to Mexico was the mother of five small children who lived in a modest home with her husband. It happened, the speaker said, her voice choked with emotion, on the hallowed feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Kucinich walked across the stage and asked her to look at his watch. "What does it say?" he asked her. "It's Our Lady of Guadalupe," she responded. Kucinich said the watch was a gift from friends in El Paso, Texas four years ago "when I was standing up for the rights of immigrants." The crowd's reaction swelled from sighs and gasps to sustained applause and cheering.
Add some descriptive lines about flowing hair and heaving bodice, along with perhaps a touch of glistening perspiration, and this would rival the best in romantic fiction available at your local supermarket. You can almost see Dennis' bronzed muscles straining through his torn shirt as the audience swelled, can't you?
I'm not saying that the event wasn't as the writer described, but I would have thought a more natural response to "What does it say?" might be "Six-fifteen".
Also, please note the description of the ICE raid in the first paragraph - "Among those detained and exiled to Mexico". Deporting an illegal alien is now exile? I don't think that word means what the writer thinks it means. Deportation, to the best of my recollection, is sending 'em back home.
Here's a bonus passage from the same press release:
The final "connection" with the loudly kindred audience came with the final question from the event leaders. Would the Congressman agree to meet with representatives of today's sponsoring community action organizations within the first 100 days of taking office, if elected President?
"I'll do better than that," he said. "You can sleep in the Lincoln bedroom."
Nice to know that it isn't necessary to elect Hillary in order to return to the Clinton era. I wonder if Obama or Edwards will announce plans to rent the Lincoln bedroom in return for votes and donations as well. You know, just to keep up...
While I was over at Red State, this post caught my eye. H/T to Erick for the link to this:
When the lights go up on the Democratic presidential debate (the Iowa Brown and Black Forum) this Saturday, all the cameras will be HD. What's more, HDNet is the exclusive national broadcaster of the event.
Exclusively in high definition! John Edwards is right about the two Americas - and along with Hillary, Obama, and the rest, guess which America isn't invited to watch this debate?
Kinda hurts to look at it, eh?
Via AP/Yahoo:
New poll shows Clinton trails top 2008 RepublicansWASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton trails five top Republican presidential contenders in general election match-ups, a drop in support from this summer, according to a poll released on Monday.
The former first lady trails Giuliani, Romney, Fred Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee by 3 to 5 points points in direct matches.
Pollster John Zogby: "The questions about her electability have always been there, but as we get close this suggests that is a problem."
I'm making popcorn if anyone wants some.
Yeah, I watched it. Here are my impressions:
The first 10-15 minutes were exciting due to the backbiting. After that, they settled down into the familiar Bush-bashing pattern.
Hillary was on-game. She needed to be aggressive without coming off as nasty and largely succeeded. She's still going to be the front runner for a while yet. The audience booed twice when Hillary was attacked. Playing the gender card is apparently effective.
Chris Dodd and Joe Biden gave some good answers - particularly Dodd when answering about security vs. human rights. Making sense is death to your campaign when running with this crowd, though. Biden got bonus points for giving a one-word answer.
Obama had a very bad night. It took Wolfe nearly 5 minutes to get an answer about the drivers license issue. He also slipped and referred to illegals as "illegal aliens". That'll piss off the open borders crowd.
Speaking of pissed, Kucinich was. And with good reason, too. He had to prompt Wolfe to let him have a chance to answer a question. No matter how loony he is, as long as he's on stage with Hillary and Obama, and deserves equal time and consideration. Of course, it won't happen, since Democrats really don't care about fairness.
Edwards loves pandering to the nutroots. I heard him repeat the word "neocon" a few times, that resonates with the delusional fringe. He also mentioned Cheney a few times, which gets the nutroots speaking in tongues. He'll be the winner with the Daily Kos crowd.
Richardson pandered as well. He even managed to invoke "Haliburton" in an answer that had nothing to do with it.
Hypocrite alerts - Hillary for saying she's not playing the gender card and following with something that sounded a lot like "vote for me because I'm a woman". Dodd for saying he has no litmus test for judges then saying he won't appoint a pro-lifer.
The second half was interesting - CNN wanted the Dems to look good, as they lined up victims one by one. One said he was a victim of racial profiling caused by the Patriot Act, no one called him on it. Update (11:28 PM): One of the CNN's "victims" is a war protester. And that's CNN's idea of an "undecided voter"? And why isn't Dan Riehl on my blogroll? Fixed.
Also, what idiot let the question about jewelry get asked?
If I had to pick, I'd say Biden won - at least in debate terms. Since he doesn't have a chance, though, that matters little. What does matter is who lost - Obama. Most folks have open minds, if he had taken a decisive stance on the illegal alien question and attempted to explain why he felt that way, folks would have respected it. Instead, he wasted everyone's time trying to avoid being pinned down to an answer on a question that wasn't difficult. It made him look especially bad after attacking Hillary on the exact same thing for the past 2 weeks.
Since Obama's loss is likely to be Hillary's gain, she'll emerge as the apparent overall winner through default - even though she didn't win through her answers.
Lots of starboard-leaning blogs (including many of my favorites) are ragging Hillary for the planting of questions in the audiences at her stump speeches.
Please carefully note that I think the practice of planting questions is dishonest, and I don't condone it at all. But in the overall spectrum of what's wrong with politicians and political campaigning, this ranks fairly low. While I have no data, at a gut level I suspect this kind of thing happens very frequently at campaign stops for politicians of all stripes. It's a relatively stupid kind of dishonesty as well - if a candidate wants to talk about an issue he/she needn't wait for a question.
Let me graphically illustrate my opinion. The dishonest practice of planting questions is larger than this:
But much smaller than this:
Far more worrisome would be flooding the audiences with planted questions in order to shield the candidate from the ordinary citizens' questions. So far, this hasn't been suggested by accounts I've seen.
So, I'm going to differ with my linked-above peers and say that this shouldn't be a big deal.
There's plenty of substantive things to post about when looking at the Democratic candidates and their destructive platforms. This shouldn't be among them.
This post was blocked by Blogrolling.
It's kind of a girl fight story with a little moonbatty BDS thrown in to stroke the base:
"Senator Clinton is voting like a hawk in Washington, while talking like a dove in Iowa and New Hampshire," Edwards said, referring to two crucial early-voting states.
"She's giving the administration exactly what it wants again."
Edwards also warned in a speech in Iowa City, that the Bush administration was trying to use attacks on US forces in Iraq, to justify a war with Iran.
"George Bush, Dick Cheney and the neocon warmongers used 9/11 to start a war with Iraq, now they're trying to use Iraq to start a war with Iran," he said.
This stuff from Edwards and the others is going to be pure gold for the Republicans next year. We've already seen Hillary play the "victim girl" card, so expect it to be played after she wins the nomination and the Republican candidate points out any inconsistency, no matter how accurate, in her positions. Having Democrats make the point instead will be so much easier.
Do you think these folks are going to rally around Hillary after she gets the nod? Count on it. And even the least amount of critical review from the press will prompt the best tap-dancin' you've ever seen. All the latest dust-ups between Hillary and the other candidates also serve to illustrate that they know how dishonest their positions are - it just takes a heated primary to get 'em to admit it.
