Clinton: Listen to political enemies, not terrorists
By Soren Dayton Posted in 2008 — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
With Hillary Clinton the seemingly inevitable Democrat presidential nominee, conservatives are going to have to start reminding people just how bad "that woman" is.
The good news? There is quite a bit of material to work with. Like this article in The Hill by Alex Bolton. He is writing about a new book by Don Van Natta, Jr., and Jeff Gerth, a current and a former New York Times reporter, respectively. Excerpts:
“Hillary’s defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.
“The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill. Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."
So she listens in on the conversations of her political enemies? But the CIA better not listen in to the conversation of America's enemies. Oh no, that's a violation of their rights!
In August, Clinton voted against an emergency law that temporarily expanded the government’s power to conduct surveillance on American soil without a warrant. The bill was criticized for being overly broad and sidelining the role of a special court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
You can see how she could be a change candidate. In her strange world, there probably isn't enough hypocrisy and venality in Washington. And she actually could change that.
Is her middle name...the country couldn't survive her Hillaryship, I'm afraid.
Btw, nutty...I like your "Bill the Thrill"...ha...too funny.
I can just imagine the type of land deals she's planning on denying involvement in.
Kos Krazies forfeit credibility because they are blinded by Bush hate. They spin their wheels and become fairly easy to ignore.
The trap is the same with Hillary hate: it indicates a defensive posture.
Engineering this dynamic was Rove's specialty. Think what you may of him as a president, but W. represented a GOP on offense.
By contrast, the GOP that obsessed about the Clintons was on defense.
Why go back?
Conflating Hillary with some huge odious talisman affords her undue stature in the eye of the independent voter.
Think what you may of him as a president, but W. represented a GOP on offense.
This is the very first time I've seen anybody write something on this subject that is so the very opposite of reality.
I would love to see mbecker's reaction to this ...
mbecker would have to use "idiot"!! And rightfully so...
" in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
jdub19 -- thanks for your substantive contribution to this discussion.
way I see it. I've seen O, and you thinking GWB was on O is, well..strange.
" in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
So because I claim that a guy who won 2 presidential elections must play pretty good offense, that makes me an "idiot"?
no...you thinking that GWB knows how to go on the OFFENSIVE is idiotic.....I wish he knew how to...I was a huge supporter of his.
" in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
When you start out calling yourself a 'compassionate conservative,' implicitly apologizing for conservatives and thus segregating himself from us, that's not Republicanism on offense. That's Republicanism divided.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
That we are all suffering from GDS (Gore Derangement Syndrome) That's right, ever since Gore ACTUALLY won the 2000 election, the right has fixated on the former Vice-President and THAT is why we reject AGW!
I fear for our country when I read all the hate coming from the left all over the internet -- they seem to OWN the internet. Google; netscape; AOL; Digg it just seems so overwhelming sometime -- the leftist hate!
=========
About the Author
Lord Vegas is a true American. some would call him a Mutt, but he prefers the term mixed breed.
Just don't eavesdrop on terrorists in the interest of national security.
Apparently it's part of the Democrat playbook.
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. - David St. Hubbins
What I meant was, like them or hate then, Rove/Bush set an agenda that others had to respond to. Hillary bashing is not an agenda. It offers nothing for the future and is the same solipsistic exercise as Bush bashing.
W offered a positive vision of the future that independent voters could latch onto. If you want to castigate him for not being a "true conservative" then you're ascribing a set of goals to the conservative project that preclude governing from the majority.
Does compromise with the opposition automatically disqualify one from standing as a good conservative?
If you wish to discuss unwarranted conflation, look to your own melding of criticism with bashing. Do you suggest there is no difference? Should we expect each time someone points out a Hillary Clinton flaw or drawback that they'll be called on Hillarage?
What, in other words, makes opposition to Hillary the equivalent of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Hillarage exists, just as sure as BDS, but not all criticism falls under its heading.
absentee
You're right on this point. That's why I began my post by wondering whether what I was writing was really relevant to Soren's article.
However, what caught me was the closing sentence:
In her strange world, there probably isn't enough hypocrisy and venality in Washington. And she actually could change that.
That's sounds just like a classic Kos ad hominem to me.
Retroactively, it forfeits the thrust of the claim. This is the mistake that the Atrios people, for example, make all the time. As a result, they live in a self-constructed prison of hatred which to the rest of us is just boring.
1. I'm highly disappointed at your lack of cascading kudos regarding my clever coinage of Hillarage. But hey, I'm vain like that.
2. That wasn't an ad hominem. It wasn't used to undermine a debate point. It was merely an insult. It has to be in the context of an argument or debate to be an ad hominem, and even then, it can't be merely an insult. It must be an insult designed to serve as a refutation in lieu of an actual argument. It's merely an insult. And it was used as a literary device. The point was to add a clever and amusing insult to wrap up. It was a bit of humor used to accentuate the point. I don't see how that is Hillarage (did I mention the kudos, btw?)
absentee
Not to mention there is no way she will gain any respect abroad with Bill the Thrill sleeping with anything that oozes across his path