AP :
For the second presidential debate in a row, Hillary Rodham Clinton can expect to be everyone's punching bag. This time she'll be on the stage to defend herself.
Republicans ganged up on the New York senator during their debate last week in Florida, knowing that was a good way to energize the GOP base. Democrats are criticizing Clinton because she's the candidate to beat in their own primary.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
*
Aren't the Freaking Republican supposed to be "Everyone's Punching Bag"??
*
Yes.
.
Yeah but ... this is kinda the golden gloves tourney to see who can best punch the lights out of those nasty repugs for the (michael buffer voice) "Undisputed Heavyweight Championship Of The World."
.
I agree.
To the extent that any democratic candidate wastes our time going after Hillary Clinton rather than the shredder in chief of our Constitution - they can forget about my vote.
The candidate that has the guts to take on the Bush administration will command my interest.
Right now that would be Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich.
I also respect the passion of Gravel.
can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. I suspect after the bill thing, she'll hold her own, that is what pisses a lot of folks off. a more cogent comment here is, if you truly look at those running, the repugs, absolutely not, the dems, well the best of a lo to average lot. she got her baggage of course but we need to try a woman in charge, that really torques the repugs, especially the religious nuts and from that perspective, I love it.
Although here on the Po, it is not PC to be a Hillary fan, but I like her. She has her faults like we all do, but she knows how to fight, and can take one on the chin, and come back for more. That is definately a quality I want in a President. People say she's a hawk, but I don't think that's true. She has to show those who would accuse her of being soft on terrorism, that she will not play, when and if such a serious circumstance arises. Such as Iran. She has adamantly stated that bush MUST go to Congress before going to war. I don't think Congress is going to fall for the same nonsense they did in 03.
Hillary is definately in favor of exausting all diplomatic avenues before resorting to war, as it should be.
Well if she can't hold up among fellow Dems, then she is unlikely to withstand actual enemy fire - I for one will be listening very carefully to her explanation around that Iraq vote.
What will you be listening for? Hillary has been repeating the same explanation for the past 3 months. Isn't it about time to move on from the Iraq vote thingee?
If you're not voting for her in the primary then thats fine but as Democrats, we should all get behind the nominee whomever that is, period.
"we should all get behind the nominee whomever that is, period."
---------------------
that's a pretty frightening statment, no matter which party is being referred to.
Not only her vote on Iraq, but what about her recent vote regarding Iran?
I think she owes the entire party of voters many explanations, if she is expecting support and votes.
Because if one didn't know better it's as if she and Bushco ARE on the same page on the Middle East. And with Murdoch endorsing her, it further implies that she is on the same page as Bushco.
It does beg the question: DOES she agree with the PNAC objective? We deserve to know this. If she says she doesn't agree with the PNAC objective and manifesto, then why is voting as if she does?
What ARE her thoughts on foreign affairs -- specifically Iraq/Iran and the M.E. -- will she answer the question/s directly, and will her answers coorelate with her voting history?
WE don't need another Bush!
Here is the general explanation from a war protester who met reality on a train, from today's Boston Globe:
"I WAS coming home on the Red Line on Saturday afternoon after attending the antiwar rally on Boston Common.
I was holding a poster that someone had handed me at the rally. It said "No War in Iran," and I was thinking I might post it in my front window.
A young woman in her 20s sat down beside me on the train and quietly asked if she could ask me a question: "Why are you against a war with Iran?"
My response referred to the disasters of our current administration, its misguided goals and failures, etc.
She replied, "I am Iranian, my family is Baha'i, and currently there is a holocaust going on in Iran against the Baha'i and against Christians and nobody hears about this. Eighty percent of the population in Iran is praying for a war to bring down the government."
She got up to get off at her stop, and I thanked her for speaking to me.
The poster is sitting on my kitchen counter.
DEBORAH SILVERSTEIN
Cambridge"
If elected, Hillary will disappoint us, just as Pelosi has. She will not end this war any time soon. And she will not give America back to the people and take her away from the corporations.
No one will end the war in Iraq. They've got oil and we need. Keep in mind - the biggest embassy in history in Baghdad and fourteen vast military bases scattered throughout the country. Peak Oil is upon us.
"Peak Oil is upon us."
--------------
hmmm...
I wonder what they discussed in cheney's infamous energy meetings at the onset of the administration?
why HAS cheney refused to share the minutes?
I disagree. How could anyone disappoint after 8 years of neo-con warmongering. She has stated more than once that if bush doesn't end the war by the time the next president is in office, that she would end it. Big promise, I know, but I, for some unclear reason, believe her.
These candidates need to stop picking on each other and keep the focus on how to get rid of the neocon infestation of America.
It's unseemly.
Hillary is everyone's punching bag, as well she should be.
But I hope the critiques don't make her seem like a sympathetic "victim." Millions of people would vote for her because of it, which is sad commentary on the electorate.
Come to think of it, what has the electorate done for you lately?
It has been building all day on the TeeVee....
The frame is set.
HRC.....Victim.
Wolfson is going to milk this from now until the Primaries.
The other frame that has been set is that two months before the first vote is cast, tonights debate will determine whether ANYONE will unseat Hillary from her crown. Yes that's right folks. The MSM has determined that:
1), anyone who points out real difference on issues with HRC is "Attacking her". Policy is off limits.
2), Everyone is now ganging up on poor HRC because they have no other way to shake her "Flawless Campaign".
3), Anyone who is not able to get a reaction out of HRC that isn't pre-programmed, anyone that can't get her to take an actual stand on anything, fails to "do what needs to be done" in order to "engage" Clinton and shake her "national" (sample size, 1000 out of a population of 300,000,000)poll numbers.
That's right folks, do you recognize the terms of a "win" here? Yep, it's the old Republican, "If we lose we win, and if we win we win".
Expect to see in Bold Print tomorrow morning all of the MSM declaring....
IT'S OFFICIAL....HILLARY UNSTOPABLE.....OBAMA, EDWARDS FAIL TO SHAKE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!
what total crap.
Good, she should have fun counterpunching the sissys.
Ain't nobody gone be touchin Hillary!
Ain't nobody on that stage got nutz big as Hillary?
Bunch of girly men lookin to hold her purse.
Make great news huh?
Who care about Hillary?
Kucininch is quietly gaining ground. People are no longer saying "I wish Kucinich would be electable" and realizing Kucinich is electable - because he is 100% correct, on every single issue, and has the courage to tell the truth and introduce courageous legislation.
His gorgeous, intelligent, sexy, devastatingly tall, red-headed wife has nothing to do with it.
Loading comments…
First Posted: 10-30-07 07:41 PM | Updated: 03-28-08 02:45 AM