Strangelove
Misunderstood Genius
Originally posted by Alliance
No, my perceptions aren't yours. If you think you have a monopoly on reality you're more delusional than I am.
I don't make assumptions about either Clinton's or Obama's personality, but you did.
That's what I'm talking about.
Oh, so you're a strong supporter of Bush and his "I will do this because I said so policy?"
You're so wrong it's not even funny. What is the catastrophically bad thing about doing things that you said you would do? Because the other choices are either not doing what you said you would do, or doing things you said you would not do. Neither sounds desirable to me.
Candidates aren't DICTATING their moves based on what they did, but this country is a mess, ESPECIALLY internationally. If Hillary doesn't have the guts to admit this war was wrong and that she authorized it, she shouldn't be behind the desk in the oval office.
Clinton has done everything short of saying it was a mistake. The "not apologizing for the vote" is a non-issue. Bottom line, she's just as against the war as any other candidate. The radical antiwar Democrats are trying to use it as a wedge issue to ruin her simply because they don't like her. And so far...
it's not working It's an issue of taking responsibility for one's action. SAYING "I take responsibility" is not good enough. You apologize to the people. You're a student of poli-sci. JFK apologizes for Bay of Pigs and the US moves on. Clinton denies an affair and we get impeachment and months of tabloids.
Your examples are disjunct. JFK
apologizes, Clinton
denies, he did not refuse to apologize. The examples don't jive.
And may I remind you that during the impeachment proceedings by a vigilante Republican Congress, Clinton's approval ratings soared and Congress's plummeted. It was an impeachment that never should have happened.
People make mistakes, they prove them. I think Clinton didn't apologize because she's obsessed with her credibility as ho-hum ho-hum tough on terrorists. This country can't afford another president who doesn't connect.
How would apologizing soften her stance on terror? Does John Edwards get accused of being soft on terror because he apologized?
Clinton's credibility is higher than the other candidates' already. She's been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for 6 years. She talks regularly to generals and our forces on the ground. And those generals and troops have been very appreciative of her concern and impressed by her candor. I don't see how not apologizing for a vote in 2002 affects that at all.
No, you simply interpreted what I said as being trained in politics for years.
Calling her a "born-and-bread candidate tends to imply that.
HOW many years have we been told Hilliary is going to be running for the presidency? At least since 2000. She is undoubtedly the heavy favorite. Don't pretend she is something she's not.
I'm not denying that she's the heavy favorite. I'm just saying that just because there has been speculation since 2000 does not mean that
she herself was "born-and-bred"
😆 Are YOU effing serious? EVERY democratic candidate is anti-war, pro choice, pro equality. What you said applies to every democrat. Obama's been more anti-war than she is and HE's had more legislation to try and end it. He's been talking about this for years. Clinton is LATE to this issue.
What is this a competition for who's the most antiwar? 😆
Yes, that is the general platform for the Democratic party. And Clinton also has clear stance on all those issues. Something I cannot say for Obama.
Clinton is a respected figure in the world, but she doesn't have a much foreign policy experience as Richardson.
Obama is smart as hell too. And "trying her darndest" doesn't mean anyhing. DOING is what matters.
I said "do her darndest" because the president doesn't have unlimited powers. It's not like she can just call a healthcare plan into being and implement it immediately.
Obama HAS experience with healthcare. With his guidance Illinois now has UNIVERSAL healthcares for children under 19. Where is Clinton but dancing around the edges of a real program?
Dancing around the edges?
WHAT? Are you just completely ignoring 1993?
Obama has a vision and can lead. Clinton may be respected, but Obama can stir souls and that is more powerful than you can imagine.
Bloody brilliant. Obama can stir souls. Well, Clinton can lead a country and lead it well. I'll be damned if I'm wrong, but isn't that the more important of the two?
And where is Clinton on religion? on values? or family? These new issues that have become critical in society. Obama can address these issues, they're part of his vision. They're not part of Clinton's. Its just the same old story from her.
yawn You can keep saying that Clinton doesn't speak out on these things, that won't make it true. May I remind you (again) that Clinton is an expert on children from her years, no,
decades working with them and for them? There's your family credentials.
Political Positions of Hillary Clinton (Wikipedia)
Knock yourself out.
All you see from Obama is pomp and circumstance? They maybe pay closer attention to what he says.
I pay very close attention to what he says. He is a soufflé. Very pretty. Clinton is meat and potatoes.
Clinton may be able to run the nation, but Obama can move it forward resolving problems. Obama hits voting reform. Where is Clinton? Obama hits families. Where is Clinton? Obama hits the relationship between faith and politics. Where is Clinton? Where is Clinton on immigration?
For that matter, where is Obama? I've been giving examples this whole time, what you've said is "Obama has a position on this" Well that's fine and dandy.
What is it? Obama can work the people. Can Clinton? I dont think so. (Maybe she just can't move me)
This reminds me of the 2004 election with the question: Which candidate would you rather have a beer with (which of course, Bush won)? But Al Franken (or someone) mentioned that the better question is: Who would rather have beside you in a foxhole?
You may not "give a shit about qualities or flaws," maybe thats why you want Clinton to be president. I care about qualities and flaws.I think Clinton is one of the best politicians in America. But right now, America doesn't need just a politician as president. America needs a leader and sponsoring legislation or working your way through the ranks doesn't count as leading.
Well you may think that Clinton is "just a politician", but you and I simply disagree. I
know she's just as much a leader as you think Obama is.
Because Clinton is complacent because she thinks she has this wrapped up.
Again, you make assumptions. You should stop that. Why does Clinton think she has it wrapped up? Because
you think that she thinks that? Try again.