Why Hillary Clinton Still Matters

In the remaining Democratic presidential primaries, voters are blessed with two candidates who are smart, energetic and forward-looking. Nonetheless the residents of states like Wisconsin, Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania still have to decide between the two of them who will be the most qualified starting on the first day in the Oval Office. My choice is Hillary Clinton.

I have had the good fortune to observe Hillary Clinton's career while living in New York. Up-close, she is an unusually tough, savvy as well as charming political figure. While not as visible as Mayor Giuliani on 9/11, she showed great mastery in the difficult days after the attacks in helping to bring about the physical and emotional recovery of New York City and gaining Federal assistance for Ground Zero workers exposed to toxic air. As importantly, in her eight years in the Senate, she has compiled a strong liberal voting record in the tradition of the FDR-JFK wing of the Democratic Party. While she has known defeats (e.g., health care in 1994), she has turned her reversals into legislative prowess on the Hill.

Her work on the Armed Services Committee and her fact-finding visits overseas belie the notion that she has limited foreign policy experience. Her vote for the congressional resolution on Iraq in 2002 was a vote for continued weapons inspection and diplomacy and in opposition to preemptive war, as she clearly stated in her Senate floor speech. She has said on many occasions she would have voted differently had she known that President Bush would misuse his authority and dispatch US troops to Iraq without allowing UN inspectors to complete their job. Today she vows to end the war and is currently trying to prevent the establishment of permanent US bases in Iraq by requiring prior Congressional approval for any such outposts.

Of extraordinary importance, she has taken the lead on the most important economic crisis to face our country in decades. She was among the first of the first Democratic contenders to propose a bold economic recovery program designed to rescue the nation from recession. Over a month ago, Senator Clinton advocated a $70 billion emergency spending and a back-up of a $40 billion tax rebate should economic conditions worsen. Hers is a direct attempt to help the most threatened people in America - namely, lower-income families facing foreclosures of their mortgages, those in need of home heating aid, the unemployed who require extended jobless benefits and funding for alternative energy and environmental programs. Her opponent, Senator Obama belatedly came out with his own plan a few days ago which seemingly lifts most of his ideas straight out of Senator Clinton's proposal.

On a more specific level, Senator Clinton's recommendations on helping Americans caught in the sub-prime mortgage mess are far-reaching. She has called for a moratorium on foreclosures, a freezing of interest rates, the use of federal subsidies to help homeowners keep up with payments and restructure loans, and augmented regulation of the financial industry. Senator Obama has come up with an alternative plan, which, by contrast, does none of these things but tinkers around the edges. He backs a bill against mortgage fraud, supports an average $500 tax credit for homeowners and endorses additional funding for a limited class of homeowners. This is a tepid response to an enormous tragedy.

In many ways, Senator Clinton is to the left of Senator Obama. Hillary Clinton has outlined a program of universal health insurance -- meaning that every person in America would be covered. By contrast, Senator Obama's plan is more restrictive and would leave 15 million people uncovered. Lastly, Hillary Clinton is a fighter for change. Senator Obama, on the other hand, is a self-described conciliator. What Democrats want today, however, is a battler, not a motivational speaker. They have suffered enough from the vicious blows of President Bush and the Republicans. What the party needs is a nominee who will take the contest directly to the opposition. Come the Fall showdown, a candidacy of "friendly persuasion" is going to be swiftboated into oblivion.

Comments

[JonStewart4President]

I totally agree that Hillary still matters and am sick of the MSM media for saying otherwise. Heck, she's even leading in WI, according to this site.

But this is a really bad endorsement of Hillary. It's basically an argument on why not to vote for her. She didn't vote for allow UN Inspectors in Iraq, that's simply not true. She voted against the Levin bill that would have done that. She voted for a bill that said it authorized the use of force in Iraq and meant war with Iraq to any person w/an IQ over 12. Which most House Dems knew, so they voted against it, and 23 Senators voted against (even one Republican). So she not only voted for it, she's lying now when she says she didn't know that's what she was doing. That or she really was an idiot for believing George W. Bush, of all people, about this. Because if true, she was outwitted by Dubya? That is not a reason to vote for her for POTUS.

And her being a figure of contention and hated by almost 50% of the country isn't good either. All this is, is a promise to more partisanship and more divisiness. Battle-tested? More like ready to cause more battles. Most of use have had enough of that.

Still think it's stupid to count her out. The Obama campaign should start managing the expectations better and starting now.

[dapaul]

Schlesinger, like most Jewish Americans, has firmly planted his flag behind Hillary because of her support for Israel and the neo-con wars. If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, then they win either way, because the Republican candidate is also a pro-war hawk. Americans don't realize that we have basically no control over who rules us.

[sef2121]

First of all, that is a disgusting thing to say. Second of all, let me tell you why the Israelis and the Jewish-Americans like Hillary Clinton: she is the only one who can bring about a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine.
HRC has made it clear that Israel/Palestine is a priority for stability in the region and lasting peace. When the Israelis hear that Obama wants to meet with the prez of Iran without preconditions and he can't even tell us what he would talk about with him, it raises a red flag. We go and do that and Israel gets furious and any chance we have of a two-state solution is out the window. Furthermore, if Obama goes and also talks to Syria, another backer of Hamas and Hezbollah, we have just pissed off Israel to the point of no return. Like Israel or not, we need their intelligence and cooperation and we need to broker a two-state solution quick. HRC is the only one who could do this, Obama is way too quick to talk to holocaust-denying dictators who stone teenagers in public and openly cry our for the eradication of the Israeli state.
Obama also has very close ties to William Ayers and Rashid Khalidi, not to mention that wacko Farrakan at his church. This is a problem for Jewish-Americans who, like it or not, are among the most reliable voters in the country. I personally don't have any problem with Obama having ties to men formerly inside the PLO but if you think something like that wouldn't DESTROY him in the general you are way off.
Bottom line: HRC is the only hope for a two-state solution brokered by the US a la BIll Clinton style but better. Even McCain has way more credibility in that part of the world than phony Obama who talks out of both sides of his mouth. And please, don't hate on the Jews, that is so predictable and boring.

[thebeerdoctor]

When did the American people vote to decide to give Israel (or any other country) money? But since the courts have decided that money is free speech, then AIPAC has the most speech of all.

[Macready]

a two state solution won't work it has been said over and over again . . . . I think it is admirable that Obama wants to meet with Ahmendenejad . . . why should there be any preconditions to a meeting?

for far too long israel has dominated US foreign policy in the Middle East . . . this has to stop ... it's not like israel was part of the US it is a foreign country . .. meanwhile . . israel keeps breaking international law every day . . . and the Palestinians are suffering .. . israel has over 60 human rights offences and human rights violations to its credit . . . that surely must tell even you something about the zionist regime

[PhyloSeFiser]

Obama does not have close ties to Farakahn you liar. In fact Obama released a statement through his spokesperson saying that he specifically did not share Farakahns anti-semitic views.

And Hillary Clinton's caustic style of approaching problems will cause more problems over there, not less.

Obama would be much better at bringing about a two state solution precisely because he knows how to listen to both sides. he has the ability to make both sides fell that there views have been heard.

And please provide one single example of Obama talking out of both sides of his mouth. Another lie on your part.

[riverhouse]

The last thing this country needs is Israeli intelligence which has proven to be nothing but deliberately false. All we get from Israel these days are lies and deliberate distortions designed to have American taxpayers fund and American military fight their wars for them. Osama bin Laden told us specifically why we were targeted on September 11: our malodorous support for Israel's brutal occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people. And who would know better why he did it than the man who designed the deed and put it into action. Until we get more even handed in the Middle East, we will never be safe from attack. HIllary Clinton is owned by AIPAC and that is one of our fundamental problems in the Middle East: old school pols who can't think for themselves in the best interests of the United States but who take the AICAC dough and deliver another country's interests over those of our own country. If you want a fair and just two state solution, ask Jimmy Carter to produce it. He's far more experienced in the Middle East than Bill Clinton.

[pahpah25]

do not fall into the trap of confusing european zionism with judaism..........zionism originated in russia...it is not 'jewish' per se....the founders of zionism are not ME semetics.........they have no godly claim to the lands they are stealing , daily, from the arab-semetic people who have lived there for centuries.

[Macready]

thank you pahpah25 . .. the zionists also caused lots of problems for the Jews who lived in Palestine prior to the creation of Israel .. . Jews and Muslims lived in peace prior to the arrival of the zionists . . . the creation of the state of israel was a big mistake .. .

[Montanamotor]

Since when does it qualify someone for the presidency, when she was a president's spouse...??? This is WEIRDO! Are you proposing to elect Laura Bush for US-president, too, for that matter??

Spephen, sorry - but you are WAY off the tracks. Please, go home and think again.

[PHHNYC24]

Hillary has only been in the Senate for seven years. Not eight. Please get your basic facts correct.

[Macready]

thank you PHHNYC24 . . . "As importantly, in her eight years in the Senate, she has compiled a strong liberal voting record in the tradition of the FDR-JFK wing of the Democratic Party. While she has known defeats (e.g., health care in 1994), she has turned her reversals into legislative prowess on the Hill." if that were the case Ted Kennedy would be supporting her . . . but he clearly isn't . . . lest we forget her already failed health care provision bill . .. . and her support by the drug companies . .. hmmmmmmmm hmmmmmmmmm your blog begs lots of questions . . .

the resolution hillary voted for "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" what part of the wording didn't she understand . . . the title is explicit . . . most of us knew what it meant . . so did the Germans, the Canadians, the French, the New Zealanders ...

let us also not forget her support of kyl/lieberman and her support and bill's for lieberman against the Liberal anti-war candidate Ned Lamont in CT in 2006 . . .

you are peddling a whole lot of BS . .. why do you persist?

[PhyloSeFiser]

She also voted against the Levin amendment, which would have required Bush to go to the UN for approval, and then come back to the congress if they didn't get approval. She claimed it would have weakened our sovereignty. It was the same argument used by Bush and the neocons, and it was a lie.

[Heidfeld]

Ha, macready, who is the one "peddling bs"?

Obama was a HUGE supporter of Liberman against "the liberal anti-war candidate Ned Lamont." A much bigger supporter of his than Hillary.

Don't worry though, you aren't the only Obama supporter who has been fooled by his propoganda. You probably still think he is not a washington insider, despite his PAC paying twice as much lobbyist money to Superdelegates than Hillary's has.

Yes SHE Can

[GoodGuysandBadGuys]

"Her vote for the congressional resolution on Iraq in 2002 was a vote for continued weapons inspection and diplomacy and in opposition to preemptive war, as she clearly stated in her Senate floor speech."

----------------

oh lets get real here stephen.

hillary was the first lady for 8 years. she and her husband have connections throughout the world.

it is utterly naive (or plain denial) to think that hillary didn't know that the bs on saddam was just that - trumped up bs. she knew. but she made her choice because she didn't want to be seen as soft on terrorism. in other words, she made her choice according to what was best for her political career.

do you really think that people who play games with people's lives should be rewarded for putting their own interests ahead of those of the country?

would you believe an oil man when he told you he would invade an oil-rich country only as a last resort? would you believe a man who was head of the 2nd largest oil-services contractor in the us when he told you that he would start a war only as a last report? PLEASE! I'm getting so tired of these enabling excuses.

[GoodGuysandBadGuys]

that should be "2nd largest oil-services contractor in the WORLD"

[jsinclair]

Also, she rejected the Levin amendment which would have supported UN inspectors continuing their work. (Recognized by many at the time as a good idea, but rejected by Hillary in favor of giving Bush unlimited power).

She also supported Kyl-Lieberman. And has given many comments in support of Bush throughout her 7 years in office. She has NOT been a leader of the public, only a follower of public opinion.

[Macready]

well said jsinclair .. .hillary has repeatedly shown herself to be a follower . . .

[SteveCox]

Do you have any other thing to add? This same thing has been posted at least 10,000 times on this site!

Obama is not tough enough to President. The Republicans are just licking their chops and waiting for him. Why do you think they all say they fear him more, because they don't.

Just like they said they feared Kerry more, when it was Edwards they worried about.

If you really care about progressive policy at all, you will learn to live with her imperfections. She is the best chance we have.

Once the slime machine get's going, and the race card defenses start, he will be done.

[gcswift2]

"She is the best chance we have."

You have got to be kidding. If you want to do Opposition research; who is a better target than Bill and Hillary Clinton? I mean cm'on lets be honest, between the Clintons and the Obama; Obama has the record that can survive the R's. As far as the Racist card goes, they can try to play it, but it may work against them, because MOST Americans don't want to treated as Racist.

"Obama is not tough enough to President. The Republicans are just licking their chops and waiting for him."

I think youv'e got it backwards. "WE" are licking "OUR" chops waiting for them. They want Hillary so they can rally their base. John McCain can't do it and they know it. The R's best chance is The Clintons for 100% of the republican base and John McCain for the independants. Obama would draw from The D's base and Independants, AND some Liberal/Moderate Republicans; while Johnny gets some of the republican Base.

Give us a chance to take this fight to them. All we want is a chance.

[thirteen13]

If she could only dump Bill. Theirs is the case of devided I stand, together we fall.

[keriheb]

The Great Battler has been through 2 presidential & several governors races only to loose in Iowa coming. The great Warrior had to cry her way to a squeaky win by 2% points in New Hampshire. Slick Willie tried to save the beat up vaunted Battler, and practically destroyed the campaign in South Carolina with "its just black folk" nonsense. The Great Battler started loosing in states where the population was practically all white Maine, Idaho and Minnesota etc! Great Battler had to limp home and lend herself some $5 Million because Obama beat her with fund raising. Great Battler vaunted money machine went broke. Ouch!

Now Great battler has lost 8 straight. The weak no experience sorry baby senator from Illinois had the gall to not wait in line. Has anyone read a history book around here? Ever hear of Alexander the Great and wonder who gave him permission to conquer. It was his destiny. Destiny. The vanquished did nor relish their fate. They struggled all the way to hades.

Every generation is faced with new tactics of warfare. Those with the old technology find themselves overwhelmed on the battlefield. The Great Battler came to the battlefield with old technology. This is an election after information technology has taken over the world. Obama has mastered the new technology better than Hillary. Now the likes of this schlep is trying to tell us what we are seeing. He is the literary Merlin trying to change FATE! He is with his quill as did Harry Potter trying to say some magic words to make us believe up is down and down is up. She is the Great Battler. We have all seen this before, this slight of hand, this mish mash of nonsense often associated with the neo-cons in the political world, Bush telling us that starvation is a full belly and the economy is doing great while foreclosures are at a record pace. Now Hillary is a great battler! And they paid you to write this mish mash? No wonder the kids are all taking drugs. Nothing is real.

[SteveCox]

It sounds like you got into your kids stash.

[Mindleftnumb]

I think Obama IS a "battler". He's beating one of the most powerful political machines ever. And if you think it's just about speeches, you need to take a closer look at this grassroots campaign.

[gsikev]

Based on what facts do you state this?

[Justtellthetruth]

Hillary is to the left of Obama? She has echoed George bush on every single middle eastern war; She supported the war in Iraq. She Supported war with Iran, and she virtually CAMPAIGNED for the Israeli war with Lebanon, a war that is now considered by most Israelis to be an avoidable disaster on par with Iraq.

Her first attempt at health care was handled SO badly that it virtually scuttled any hope of health care for more than a decade and a half afterwards, leaving hundreds of millions of Americans in a situation where they are overcharged and underserved or not insured at all.

NOW, as the second largest recipient of health insurance PAC money in the entire US government, her "universal health care" plan is based on the idea of forcing every American, by law and by threat of garnished wages, to buy health insurance from her bosses based upon the premise that they will somehow now start charging and and serving people ethically, just because she (again, a HUGE recipient of their PAC money) asked them to. It's like sending every one in America to prison and calling it universal housing, simply by promising that prison is now going to be a very nice and nurturing environment.

Her career has been characterized by blind Hubris and a series of domestic and foreign policy errors that have left this nation in TERRIBLE shape on many levels.

[Chacha]

You have caught the absurdity of Hillary's Universal health Plan. You will have health insurnace for everyone by forcing them to have one?? And, that makes her plan better than Obama's plan to make health insurance affordable to the masses? I am surprised that MSM does not pick up on this.

[LunaNik]

Try reading the two plans, Chacha. Then you'll see that it's your post that's absurd.

Obama's plan would leave 15 million uninsured AND cost more per person. Hillary's plan would cover everyone, and she has delineated the specifics of how everyone will be able to afford it through tax credits and limiting premiums to a percentage of income.

I'm surprised YOU haven't picked up on the fact that the MSM is no longer an objective source of news.

[Thurber]

If it were only that simple. Clinton may win the nomination, but she doesn't have a chance against McCain. She is the only hope the Republicans have of motivating their base to turn out at the polls in November.

Turn out they will, but sadly it won't be just Hillary that pays the price, but all of the candidates downticket. Not to mention are flailing democracy that I fear cannot survive another 8 years of senile and/or simply incompetent Republican rule.

[MyThought]

Obama and his supporters can't even take critiques from the Hillary bunch - how in hell is he going to take it when the Republican destroy package comes out.

Oh my, must not say anything against Messiah Obama - he's made of glass and you can't criticize him or everyone will hate you.

Makes him look weak to me. I've had enough of the speeches - bored now with them.

[keriheb]

Addicting aren't they? Well mythought, stop listening to Obama's speeches. Just listen to Hillary and Slick Willie. Yep listen to Slick Willie and rock yourself to sleep.

Remember Obama cannot fight. Hillary is not really loosing, she is just giving Obama these states to give him a head start so she can ultimately show how tough she is. He is one win from the finish line and Hillary is going to run from last place to beat him in a photo finish! Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! At this point even if she wins she looses. The party will split and the acrimony which has already begun will only increase. This is who she is.

So don't listen to Obama, please don't. Obama's words are poison. Listen to Hillary's flute, toot toot toot as you march into the rising seas.

[denicast]

Critiques from the Clinton bunch? Look the Clinton campaign has been completely mishandled and Obama has been running a brilliant campaign so far. He has not once said you cannot criticize him. He has said publicly that he welcomes this as a way to prepare him for the battle ahead.

I do not hate you. I just am here to correct the misinformation and let you know why people have trouble voting for Hillary. There are troubling signs that say that she is not going to be as good a leader as Obama. We are explaining why she is going to have problems getting through what she claims she will do.

It is one thing to support your candidate and let us know what bothers you about Obama, but do your homework first and be open to learn about Obama.

[Neff]

It saddens me to read an endorsement by such an obviously bright guy that spends just a few loosely-argued lines at the end on the central issue of electability: which of these two candidates with the nearly identical policy positions is most likely to be able to win back the White House?

The thought that Hillary is more electable because she is more accustomed to weathering attacks is at least a coherent rationale, though, which is more than can be said for many of the sentiments sympathetic to Hillary's candidacy one hears these days.

I would argue that it still ignores some key facts, among them: (1) Hillary has in fact NOT weathered the assaults from the vast right-wing conspiracy, the talk-show joke writers and the sexist masses well at all, in that however high her spirits may be, almost half of the electorate views her unfavorably, often extremely so (2) Obama is no lightweight, having come up through the sweetness and light of Chicago politics.

Most of this reads like a fine endorsement for Hillary's reelection to the Senate. That stuff is perfectly valid, but not especially relevant to the choice at hand.

[jsinclair]

How do we know she can weather all these attacks unless we have all the facts?

I mean, seriously, why won't she disclose her tax returns now? Why won't they publicize the list of library donors?

I don't want any "surprises" in October.

[TMIDGE66]

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT OBAMA CAN WEATHER THESE ATTACKS. WHO CARES ABOUT HER INCOME TAX. SOME MORE SUBTERFUGE AND PETTY AT THAT. COMPARE SENATE RECORDS, COMPARE THE LAST 20 YEARS AND YOU WILL COME UP WITH A GOOD SPEECHWRITER FOR OBAMA AND HARD WORK FOR HILLARY. OPEN YUR EYES.

[robertindc]

Where does the "battler" get her experience? What punch has she taken? Wait, wait it was the toughness showed in 92--yes somehow the geniuses with HRC's help managed to get Ross Perot to take 19% of the vote (mostly from Bush 1). Or no, it was the Senate race--oh what a battle she fought. Behind in the polls she is delivered a great gift--Rudy G drops out due to prostate cancer in the middle of the race and then she gets to fight the Republican Machine in the body of Rick lazio (or Fazio) a 30 year old unknown long Island congressman. Where does this BS that she is a fighter start? Now Nancy Pelosi, Ann Richards those are some battlers. HRC--lucky fraud.

[CrimsonTom]

Odd of you to overlook the Ken Starr/government sponsored multi-million dollar/multi-year investigation that included subpoena power over everyone she and her husband ever met.

In case you missed the '90's, the whole thing is very well-documented on the internet.

[Thurber]

Also odd of him to overlook that Hillary and Bill promised Universal Health Care in both his initial election and his re-election. Both well documented on the internet.

Now she's promising it ... again ... on her election.


Are You a believer yet?

[robertindc]

O.K.. CrimsonTom, concde the battler does have experience obtructing justice and well spending millions of tax payer dollars becuase "he" did not have sex with that woman Ms Lewinsky. Recall that pretty well from the 90's....How can we forget? It is pretty well documented--they are dispicable.

[robertindc]

I love that people still call those long meandering screeches comprised 30% of "you know" and 20% of "Me" and "I" uttered by Ms. Clinton are called "speeches". So she has a few stats from the statistical abstract on her stump speech and thus she is a policy genius.........If only a Third party candidate comes in and wins for you like Perot in 92 did (took 19% of Bushes vote) or if Rudy G drops out due to illness and the "battler" gets to "battle" a junior congressman from Long Island. If nothing else, we see how the clintons really were just lucky and now people like the author want them to be good and wise...Nah--luck opportunists, no more no less. Somehow the 50-65 plus generation identifies with them...someday in 100 years or so Clinton will be regarded in the same way we regard those presidents from the late ninetenth century (minus wierd facial hair), pretty thin acienvements but known for personal weirdness--first bath tub (taft), liked the girls (harding), took naps (coolidge), had sex with the intern (clinton) and then his wife wanted the whitehouse.....Hacks, hacks, hacks, but the insiders like the author love the Hardings, Tafts and Clintons........

[CrimsonTom]

Way to demean war hero Bob Dole.

[kmdippenger]

I've done enough research of the Clinton past to know that they are anything but altruistic. Please spare the details regarding all the great things Hillary has/is/will fight for in the name of our suffering country. I for one am tired of "the fight" and am looking for something different. That someone is Barack Obama. Speaking of fight...reread Linn Cohen-Cole's letter to Hillary regarding Monsanto http://www.counterpunch.org/cole02082008.html2008.html

[dmthurman]

Obama supporters get over it. Hillary will lose the over all vote, the state count, and the pledge count and still win the Nomination. Hillary is right, Obama doesn't have enough experience, translated means he's not as connected. I would be Completely shocked if Obama is nominated.

[keriheb]

Obama will not loose anything. We the citizens of the U.S. will loose. He will still be a great person, husband to Michelle, father to two lovely daughters, son of a wonderful woman from Kansas, and well lets be kind to his father. He was a great sperm donor. It was in fact a necessary ingredient.

Obama won't lose anything at all. The public will loose a chance to have something and someone different who will have a completely transparent government. Oh yes it will be because all of those white males will be out there watching him, watching him from the justice department, watching him from the U.S. Senate, watching him from the House of Representatives. He will be the most watched man in the world. If he passes gas it will be recorded as it contributes to the methane of the atmosphere.

This is the kind of government we need. We need to watch someone in the white house and not take them for granted. If he messes up he will not last even one term. You can be certain of that. Black folk are not given that latitude. He will be great or he will be gone. Tell me Hillary can take that? Oh no she cannot.

[jsinclair]

He may not be as "connected" but he's already out-organized the well-oiled Clinton machine--and brought a lot of new voters into the party in the process.

I'd rather take my chances with him than go with the evil I already know.

Note: being vetted isn't necessarily a good thing. I can think of 10 different smears the Repubs will use against Billary in the fall. Yes, the Clintons are known--and very divicive.

[thirteen13]

Warm up that rubber suit, it might protect you from the shock.