Article

2006-06-13 Home Front: Politix

Hillary OKs co-dependent strategy for 2008

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-06-13 10:11|| || Front Page|| [11134 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Now remember, you're getting twoferone, so...

Posted by Captain America 2006-06-13 10:37|| 2006-06-13 10:37|| Front Page Top

#2 Yea but KARLS' back on the prowel!!

Posted by ARMYGUY 2006-06-13 10:46|| 2006-06-13 10:46|| Front Page Top

#3 The word "honoraria" used in association with either of these two people is beyond disgusting.

Posted by Besoeker 2006-06-13 12:01|| 2006-06-13 12:01|| Front Page Top

#4 I'll believe it when I see the cigar.

Posted by DoDo 2006-06-13 13:19|| 2006-06-13 13:19|| Front Page Top

#5 Go for it Hillary!

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 13:19|| 2006-06-13 13:19|| Front Page Top

#6 I'll believe it when I see the cigar

You think there IS one? LOL

Nope, HRC has a good deal of baggage in her own right. I'm glad to support women in public office, on the strength of their records. She's not one of the ones I support, for precisely that reason.

Posted by lotp 2006-06-13 13:24|| 2006-06-13 13:24|| Front Page Top

#7 WASHINGTON - A liberal crowd both booed and cheered Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday after she encouraged Democrats to have a "difficult conversation" about their position on the Iraq war in order to win over middle-of-the-road voters.

Clinton's attempt to strike a moderate stance on the divisive issue of the war contrasted sharply with the angry words of another potential presidential contender, Sen. John Kerry, the party's 2004 standard-bearer, who called the war "immoral" and a "quagmire."

At a speech before a liberal gathering dubbed "Take Back America," the New York senator took grief from those in the audience critical of her vote for the Iraq war and her opposition to an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.

"I do not think it is a smart strategy, either, for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government," said Clinton, before turning to the anti-war liberals' core beef with her.

"Nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interests," said Clinton, prompting loud booing from some at the gathering.

Clinton has been seen as the early favorite among potential Democratic candidates for president in 2008, but she is increasingly at odds with anti-war liberals over her past vote and current position on Iraq.

"Sometimes this is a difficult conversation, in part because this administration has made our world more dangerous than it should be," she said.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 13:29|| 2006-06-13 13:29|| Front Page Top

#8 Yes, I'm glad she's holding her ground on that. It's other issues I disagree with her on.

Posted by lotp 2006-06-13 13:33|| 2006-06-13 13:33|| Front Page Top

#9 I disagree with every GOP figure on issues as well. Even McCain. But I am comforted to know that if its McCain against some Democrat I cant stomach (say Howard Dean, for arguments sake, though i dont expect he'll be the left standard bearer) there will be Republican whom I feel I can trust the future of the republic to.

I dont expect the Repubs here to PREFER Hillary to, well, Republicans. Im not here to argue the merits of say, national health insurance, or community policing. I DO think you should consider, when YOU have your own difficulties with any particular Repub nominee, that IF Hillary is the Dem nominee, you will have someone who is in the right place on national security. And has the courage to stand up for beliefs to a hostile audience.

and there just may be some of you out there, who follow the logic of Robert Kagan - that the WOT cant be seen as the property of the GOP, and that its important for US interests, that the Dems be forced to take responsibility for the hard choices it involves.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 13:57|| 2006-06-13 13:57|| Front Page Top

#10 you couldn't pay me to vote for this b*tch

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-06-13 14:04|| 2006-06-13 14:04|| Front Page Top

#11 Frank G, etc.

Could you do me a favor, please?

Mosey over to Kos, DU, etc, and explain to them how youre a firm conservative Republican, and how you wont vote for Hillary cause shes a firm liberal, a socialist, etc, etc. Remind them of her pro-choice politics,her support for "that commie health care scheme", her support for gays in the military, and other stuff like that, would you?

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 14:08|| 2006-06-13 14:08|| Front Page Top

#12 "Bill will be politicking alone and with Hillary, and the idea is to present them as a loving couple."

Another lie, in other words. Big surprise.

Posted by mojo">mojo 2006-06-13 14:12|| 2006-06-13 14:12|| Front Page Top

#13 we gots Iran trying to get nukes.

We gots terrorists trying to take over Iraq, and over 50 Iraqis a day dying, and a bunch of Americans trying to get us out (which would meant the terrs takeover)

We got Americans and foreigners whove forgotten there are jihadis trying to kill us, and who think the WOT is something invented by George Bush.

at this point, I dont care if Hillary sleeps with Bill. I dont care who or what she sleeps with. I want more Jihadis to sleep in the dirt, and if she can get the US more united in support of that, well .....

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 14:19|| 2006-06-13 14:19|| Front Page Top

#14 Besides, if she wins, it doesn't follow she gets the legislature, especially the Senate. In fact, the donks have been giving the trunks ugly minority legislator lessons. I would not want to be the donk president in 2009.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-06-13 14:33|| 2006-06-13 14:33|| Front Page Top

#15 Does this mean that Comrade Hillary will appear with a 'stain' on her blue dress?

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-06-13 14:40|| 2006-06-13 14:40|| Front Page Top

#16 more good news

according to the TNR blog, Murtha has given up his quest to be majority leader. If the dems win and Pelosi becomes speaker, at least the majority leader will be the reliable and competent Steny Hoyer.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-06-13 15:17|| 2006-06-13 15:17|| Front Page Top

#17 Yes, her marriage is fine. It doesn't bother her at all that her husband raped a woman.

Posted by JSU 2006-06-13 20:30|| 2006-06-13 20:30|| Front Page Top

#18 Liberalhawk raises an important point: whatever his or her other faults, we want both parties' winning candidates to be pro-WoT. There are a lot of issues I used to vote on, but now this is non-negotiable for me. Suppose we are presented with -- and I do not think this is going to happen, but let's blue sky it -- the choice of Clinton (D) vs. McCain (R)? Both bad choices, but at least better than Murtha (duplicitious, undermining, Marine in name only) vs. Pat Robertson (Know Nothing, Paleocon). Do not try to argue the examples, please, I am still refusing to give 2008 brain space until January of that year. ;-)

Posted by trailing wife 2006-06-13 22:30|| 2006-06-13 22:30|| Front Page Top

#19 Allen for President will be fine with me.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-06-13 22:38|| 2006-06-13 22:38|| Front Page Top

23:55 WTF!
23:49 WTF!
23:45 WTF!
23:32 DMFD
23:31 WTF!
23:24 Shieldwolf
23:13 Tibor
23:04 Frank G
23:02 Eric Jablow
23:02 SteveS
22:54 Eric Jablow
22:52 muck4doo
22:48 muck4doo
22:47 muck4doo
22:45 muck4doo
22:44 muck4doo
22:44 Frank G
22:43 Captain America
22:43 muck4doo
22:42 muck4doo
22:38 flyover
22:38 Frank G
22:35 Redneck Jim
22:35 Barbara Skolaut