What beliefs? She has to wait for the most recent poll before she knows what her beliefs are.

The author wrote that "Republicans" have had ideas for much of the last 30 years?

I think the author has been hallucinating...


Republicans have had NO IDEAS...it's the democrats that have had them!

Such sexism.

If Mr. Zakaria were writing about a MAN, would he use the word "terrified" to discuss a calculated stance (agree with it or no, ridicule it or no)?

F no!

So someone at HuffPost has the job every hour of every day to find every single possible negative article it can about Hillary Clinton and provide a link on the site. It is amazing. This particular article, from a man who is generally well-thought out,has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. It takes about one second to say- "wait a minute." What he is saying is that Hillary is afraid to take difficult political stances. In fact, terrified! Yet, here she is being pilloried by this very site and millions of people for her unpopular vote to give the President the right to go to war....Now that's a hole we can drive a bus through.

This is a brilliant piece by Zakaria. Too bad he decided to use the Cuba issue, which is relatively obscure and unknown to most voters, to illustrate his point about Hillary.

The main point he is making is that Bill and Hillary's political careers as successful Democratic politicians are based on the 1980s and 1990s paradigm that a Democrat has to move to the center, and ultimately to the right, to be elected.

Zakaria is absolutely correct when he points out that this is the "old" paradigm, and that times have changed, and, to a large degree, left the Clintons behind. The Clintons are way "behind the curve" when it comes to understanding the true nature, zeitgeist, and aspirations of the American electorate circa 2008. America is a much different country now than in 1988, around when the DLC was born, and the 90s, the DLC's heyday. Geopolitically, socially, culturally, and economically, things are much different, and the Clinton's brand of "Third Way" centrism is no longer convincing or compelling to a large and ever-growing segment of the electorate.

Hence, the immense popularity of Barack Obama among young people. No matter how many times Hillary sends Chelsea out to "the youth", no matter how many times they try to rally young women on "choice" (as if Obama is against reproductive choice), no matter how many times they try to prevaricate and triangulate and play to the "center", the Clintons will fail because they are increasingly behind the curve.

What in hell would I ever believe anything a right-wing shill like Zakaria has to say? He's spent the last seven years kissing chimpanzee ass, so he can get lost now.

I agree on the premise, but I disagree that her "experience" is all that great. Of course she is smart, and of course she is a follower, but experienced? In politics, yes, but in everything else, not so much.

When millions of dollars are required to even run for office you're going to get candidates who are groomed and coached to keep those donations coming in. Before the "internets" it was easy to say one thing in one town and another in a different town. Now we get their bought and paid for sales pitches in real time.

Nd no matter who the candidate is, they're not talking to us when they speak. They're talking to the big bucks donors who pay them to spread their message. Who gives Hillary money to say Cuba is bad? Who gives Huckabee money to promote one religion over any other? Who gave Bush money to lie us into war with Iraq?

It's always the money talking and never the candidate. So when you vote, you're essentially voting for one set of lobbyists over another...or sadly, the same lobbyists who have a horse in all the races.

All the quacking on tv, the papers, and even most of the blogs are to delude us into thinking we have a choice, because we're so easy to get emotionally stirred up in one direction or another.

ALF
http://mishkabear.blogspot.com

Part of the modern political process requires candidates to centralize themselves. Hillary is following the career path established by Reagan, Bush I, her husband, and Bush II.

Revisit the words of George W. Bush circa 2000, "I won't be a nation builder", and compare that creature to the one inhabiting the Oval Office, "I won't cut and run from Iraq". One can only surmise that Bush ALWAYS intended to nation build but was smart (?) enough to just grin and spin.

So it boils down to this: Hillary's chief flaw is taking a page from the old playbook while Obama's writing the new one. Candor, a detriment back in the day, now works. She needs to rub the sleep crumbs from her eyes and fearlessly be herself, for better or worse.

Just like her marriage vows, eh?

Randy

what makes you such a genius that you know whats in someone's mind--you don't have the powers of God and you are not even American born--you pathetic mind reader!

So another guy weighs in. Terrified to act on her beliefs. [yawn] Her opponent, Senator Obama, hasn't had time enough to make his beliefs quite clear ... he certainly skipped enough votes when his own beliefs might conflict with his image. A freshman senator might do that. A President has to have the cojones to make an unpopular and public decision. So far, she seems to be the one willing to do that. He speaks well. What he would *do* is anyone's guess.

This is the politics of silly. It goes along Hillary's tears.

We are supposed to assume that deep in Hillary's heart she has only good and decent and progressive and intelligent views and beliefs, but she won't act on them because she's afraid the mean old Republicans will beat her up.

Well guess what? Taking a position even when it's unpopular is considered a sign of courage, maturity, commitment, loyalty, and leadership. We have people in the Democratic party who display those characteristics on a regular basis, including Ted Kennedy, who the Clinton supporters have villified for his support of a black man.

We should judge these people based upon their actions, their platforms, and the specifics. Hillary and her husband love the corruption, the payoffs, the money. And the Cuba deal is all about money.

Congress sends hundreds of thousands of dollars to Cuban immigrants who came to the U.S. 50 years ago and have spent all those years sitting in Miami, taking my tax dollars and buying up all the real estate and getting rich without working.

That's because people like Hillary vote to send them my money so once a year they can parade around with flags saying "We Hate Castro." The whole Cuba deal is all about corruption: my tax money given to the Cubans, stolen from me. With big donations paid back to the politicians in Congress. It's a scam.

Hillary Clinton should be judged on her actions. She's done nothing for anyone except herself. She's shown no leadership. She mostly votes with the Republicans and sides with the lowest of the right-wing, including Newt Gingrich and Rupert Murdoch. She's a Republican.

The only "secret beliefs" she has is that she believes she and her husband can keep getting people to give them money for nothing. Don't vote for her. Vote Obama.

the corporations have "allowed" Obama and Clinton to proceed because neither is threatening their profits. Since all Honest candidates have already been excluded, everything from now on will be game fluff to win the election.

Obama and Clinton, cannot propose eliminating the health insurance companies for fear of what all that health insurance money could do to them. That goes for any and all other, perceived anti-corporatist proposals.

For instance pot legalization. Or ending war as a continuing welfare system for the war proffiteers.

Don't expect to get what you vote for.

I'm going to vote democratic and hope for the best.

Insightful commentary. I agree.

Not terrified, simply unable!

Metaphorically speaking, when you sell your soul to the devil, you do what Bill says!