Hillary's in for 2008

Wow. I need to bookmark that howler site. That thing is prime for using as a blueprint.

I especially like the summary of Maureen Dowd's fucktardity in 1999. I remember, far less than fondly, the column about Warren Beatty running for president.

 

"Brushing past reporters in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton -- conspicuously talking into her cell phone; whether there was anyone on the other end of the line, or not, could not be confirmed blahblahblah ..."

I wonder if people at the New York Times read over shit like this and decide: "Oh, what the hell. Let's run that, no matter how stupid it sounds."

 

Republicans/conservatives are the masters of wordspeak and the American public falls for it everytime.
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2006/8/20/165641/578

or this 2003 interview with a linguistics professor
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml
or this 2004 interview with the same professor
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/08/25_lakoff.shtml

The Republicans are masters at using language to frame issues their way

 

You know what? You're one smart liberal. Not many of them around here. But you're right...and it's been heard repeatedly. NY has had one senator for four years....Schumer. That bitch is fixing to get her comeuppance.

 

Hillary in the White House would be great for one reason -- Bill as the First Lady.

 

I don't like the idea of another 4-8 years of the Clintons in the White House.

 

Do you really think it will happen?

DyePack, that's unnecessary paranoia.

 

Damn, that means Al the Freak Gore is out of the picture.

 

She just gave the GOP its energy. Psst, libs: You want four more years of a Bush-type leadership? Put her on the ticket.

 

I think it could happen easily. The media have proved in the last two elections they could fuck up a two-car parade when it comes to these things.

 

That's the cue - Fenian and the boys, please take a bow.

 

I think Americans do a decent job of selecting their leaders. Lets face it: Gore, Bush and Kerry were all unfit to be president. Bush for obvious reasons. Gore and Kerry because their campaigns showed us their inherent weaknesses. How a candidate campaigns is an excellent indicator of their management style -- good and bad. Look at any presidential campaign and you will see telltale signs that will show up in their administration. Bush's campaigns have shown a high degree of discpline with Bush setting out grand themes and letting underlings plot the details. Bush has shown a willingess to let underlings play dirty, never willing to openly acknowledge their deeds, but never disavowing it. It is a secretive, loyal and ruthless campaign. Sound like a president you know?

Kerry's campaign showed that he was a constant victim of analysis to the point of paralysis, unwilling to shove away any advice offered, unwilling to offend his inner circle and always being completely unable to act decisively. Much of the same was true for Gore -- Naomi Wolf, pretending to be a populist when he was never a populist before that, letting advisors talk him out of giving big environmental speeches. In other words, having no real instincts. This is not an acceptable quality in a president. If you combine Kerry/Gore and Bush's best qualities, you would have a very good president -- something roughly approximating Bill Clinton without the libido issues.

The reason that campaigns are good indicators of how a president would govern are the obvious similiarities: you set out a few key themes/issues and focus on them and the rest of the campaign is nothing more than being able to react to circumstances (some delivered by your opponent, some by forces outside of anyone's control). That is what being president is all about. You can study position papers all day long, but a president gets a grace period of 6 months to a year and will, at most, pass three major initiatives during that time. Bush got his tax cuts and NCLB -- which were basically the policy cornerstones of his campaign. Bill Clinton may have allowed himself to use polls on everything under the sun, but in the end, he had instincts of his own. He was comfortable with who he was and it showed. And given some bad choices, America chose someone who would be strong and wrong over someone weak and probably right -- just as Clinton told Kerry they would.