Hillary is control freak with the press

I like it. Everyone's happy!

 

hondo... perhaps you've missed the last six years... perhaps you have only seen Fox News or Newsmax.

If President Hillary Clinton - and it's going to happen, because Hillary is very disciplined and has the best politican of the last quarter century available to give advice - restricts media access like the current Bush White House, her partisans will no doubt say "This is no different that the last administration" and probably be factually justified.

The difference will be that the "liberal media" will complain and fight about it, which is unlike your favorite media sources.

I would rather have somebody other than a Bush or a Clinton in the White House, but maybe we need another Clinton to clean up the economic mess left by Bush.

Hondo, most people on the board are way ahead of you.

 

It doesn't matter who the president is, they're all controlled by the oil companies and Hollywood and special interests.

Or maybe they're not. I don't know.

What are we talking about?

 

Welcome, Mr. River!

 

Seeing we're on a Hondo thread, can I throw in some hypotheticals?

Would President Clinton hold more press conferences than Fredo?

Would she let anyone ask questions?

Would she be able to answer in complete sentences?

Would she plant Bill at the back to ask the really tough ones, like, "Who does your hair, Ms. President"?

 

Why do people hate Hillary so much? What did she do to deserve this type of treatment from the public?

 

I figured it out.
Boots is the grandchild of Walter Scott, who ran Personality Parade back in the day.
"Whatever happened to the Vietnam War? Wasn't it a big deal or something?"

 

Because she's so transparently manipulative and ambitious, for openers.

Of course, you can say that about virtually any politician of prominence . . .

 

To what the breaker of Leopold and Loeb said -- which there's a lot of truth to -- you can add she's an intelligent, domineering (some would say strident) woman with opinions she's not afraid to express. Men are threatened by that.

Throw in the fact she tolerated her husband cheating (which some people can't get beyond), a feral right-wing media/think-tank machine that has a fearsome and unyielding loathing of everything Clinton and the above fact that emasculates some people and there you have it.

I've got some issues with Hillary, but they fall more in line with some of her hypocritical stances on health-care and other issues. Frankly, we could do a lot worse.

And for the last six-plus years, we have.

 

What happened between Bill and Hillary was and is their business. She's ambitious, so what? She walks it like she talks it.
Yeah, I can see where the old establishment is threatened by that.

 

Would she surround herself with people sworn to fidelity to the Person or the Office?
Is she open to criticism?
Is she myopic in her views?
Is she more concerned with maintaining a cadre of loyalists or a maintaining a staff with diversity of views?
Is she secure enough to deal with opponents or will she retreat to the bunker on January 22?
Does ambition translate to the personal accumulation of power or does she have a set of principles and goals that guides her?
Is she willing and able to articulate her principles to the public or does she demand blind & uncritical faith from the public?

 

1) To Her Highness.
2) Evidently, not much.

For much of the rest, we'll have to see.