१० ऑगस्ट, २०१४
"You know, when you’re down on yourself, and when you are hunkering down and pulling back, you’re not going to make any better decisions than when you were aggressively, belligerently putting yourself forward."
Said Hillary Clinton, rejecting the positions of the last 2 Presidents. The message is, of course, that she would do it better, and I observe a distinct but deniable message that she as a woman would do it better, that the male instinct is phallic — either aggressively, belligerently putting yourself forward or hunkering down and pulling back.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५१ टिप्पण्या:
Now you know why women change their minds and it's a stereotype.
"You know, when you’re down on yourself, and when you are hunkering down and pulling back, you’re not going to make any better decisions than when you were aggressively, belligerently putting yourself forward."
I don't agree with your feminist take, but do agree with her analysis:
Unlike Obama, or Bush, she'd be less likely to let opposition stop her - she's been there already.
I like it,...
Or is she saying she can't make good decisions no matter the circumstances?
Oh, wait.....
She's unfit for office.
PB Reader,
"She's unfit for office."
Not when the main qualification's passing the "Is this a racist?" test.
Rand Paul can't do it. Ted Cruz can't do it. Christie's been tarred - by the Right - too much now.
Maybe we can run Boehner,...?
Crazy. So she couldn't lead one man, yet she is going to lead a nation of 330 million? Not buying it.
Also, isn't Isis the very anti Assad force that she is saying we should have aided?
God help us if this incompetent gets elected.
The crack is democratic deceiver. He has not supported a single GOP candidate - ex: Romney.
Anyhow, as I have said a billion times, HRC is the next POTUS because of GOP:
- lack of women in leadership
- hatred of immigrants, science and scientists, and (gasp again) women of are independent thinkers
- no one in the world loves (not likes) the GOP
- no vision, no goals, no intelligence.
Next time you see HRC on TV, think of her getting a free ride to the WH, because of the reasons I just outlined.
Hillary is even more left wing than Obama and is nastier to boot.
"Said Hillary Clinton, rejecting the positions of the last 2 Presidents. The message is, of course, that she would do it better, and I observe a distinct but deniable message that she as a woman would do it better, that the male instinct is phallic — either aggressively, belligerently putting yourself forward or hunkering down and pulling back."
An assertion without a single shred of evidence to support it. Can she provide examples of her leadership, her decision-making, her accomplishments to support the claim? Somehow, I doubt it.
It's so easy to look back at others' mistakes and assert that one wouldn't have made that mistake. The question is what decisions was she responsible for, and how did they turn out? So far the only thing we've got is Benghazi.
America's Politico,
"The crack is democratic deceiver. He has not supported a single GOP candidate - ex: Romney."
ROTFLMAO!!! I can't believe you - YOU - don't remember I used to support Sarah Palin.
You've been around long enough to know not to talk like this. Say I haven't supported a single GOP candidate SINCE Romney and you might have a leg to stand on - but then, you'd also have to admit Romney isn't a true conservative, which means I had a point.
Leave the lies for newbies and outright idiots, huh?
My political views, steeped in our history and culture, are too nuanced for most to grasp (Crack thinks the Republican Party should be for blacks - like when it started?) and so, trying to dissect them - if you're an "individual" (but in a "country") with no clue about any of it - will only hurt your brain.
You should stick with trying to master english first,...
Bloody handprint on the wall Benghazi. She wasn't ready for the 3 pm or in this case afternoon phone call, either.
3 AM darn it!
Hillary has no organizing principles other than to say what is needed to get elected. If loving Obama foreign policy was the ticket, she'd be all in. If rejecting the policy she promoted for 4 years, she's ready as well....
Hillary is asserting that she would not have thrust her way into and out of Iraq.
I think it's a stretch to see this as a gender thing, though it's possible. Surely Hillary knows how that's useful to her. However, I have to say this interview made me think for the first time that I might even see it as possible to vote for her. Her comments on Israel are the clearest and sanest of just about any major pol I have seen. More generally, the point of this - that you need an assertive foreign policy that avoids passive appeasement and wishful thinking on the one had (current) and uncritical idealistic belligerence (earlier) seems right to me.
Christie's been tarred
Not Hillary.
She ain't no ways tarred.
Well she knows hunkering down. She hid her subpoenaed law records for 2 years in the White House.
And she was pretty agressively condemning some VAST right wing conspiracy
She's trying to escape the tarbaby
Oh God spare me from a wise Chicago woman---if that is what Hillary is claiming to be. Or at least the "wise woman" take is what our host seems to get.
Didn't we have enough of that junk with our "wise Latina"--who so far appears to be no great shakes as a Supreme Court Justice.
But then if the Las Vegas sports books ever offer a proposition< "Will Hillary Clinton be no great shakes as a President", I'll be on the under side of that bet like a duck on a june bug.
Of course on the hunkering down part of Hillary, I seem to recall a picaresque tale about gunfire at a Balkan airport. She's not as brash as Kerry--if she was, she would have claimed she qualified for a Combat Infantryman's Badge.
bgates, I miss you.
It does seem that since Kerry has become Secretary of State our foreign policy has become stupider. Seems like the last four years of Obama everything is getting slower and slower as the space between foreign disasters (disaster in Syria, war in Ukraine, ISIS in Iraq) becomes less. Exactly why we should support Western Ukraine so much more than Eastern Ukraine, well, I don't see it. The rhetoric is as though we are trying to pick a fight with Russia, an uncalled for dreadfully imprudent thing to do. As for ISIS, to all appearances they are so evil in committing large-scale atrocities, surely they deserve to be mostly destroyed quickly by the U.S. military, and doubly so now that they threaten Kurdistan, one of the few places in the Middle East that hasn't become very messed-up (and which has a much higher degree of gratitude toward the U.S. than other parts of Iraq). Why even bother trying to negotiate an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since no one who has tried has been able to do anything much that way since it started in the 1920s or so? It's presumptuous to think it wont be just a waste of time better spent on preventing or solving other problems. Kerry always has struck me as being something of a stuffed shirt.
As for Hillary, feeling-wise I like her better than her husband. If she chooses to think for herself, she might end up being much better than him. We've had a sorry run of presidents lately. My impression is that the first George Bush was the last at least average president we've had, and that since then each has been worse than the one previous.
Mr. Meig's, you're saying that Hillary set a rather low bar as Secretary of State.? And further that ol Lurch can't even clear that bar? Maybe if he reaches up he can chin himself on that bar.
In that Atlantic interview, this made me think of Obama's "she's likeable enough" snark in 2008:
At one point, I mentioned the slogan President Obama recently coined to describe his foreign-policy doctrine: “Don’t do stupid shit” (an expression often rendered as “Don’t do stupid stuff” in less-than-private encounters).
This is what Clinton said about Obama’s slogan: “Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.”
Revenge is a dish best served cold -- Hillary's organizing principle.
This makes me almost want to vote for her:
“One of the reasons why I worry about what’s happening in the Middle East right now is because of the breakout capacity of jihadist groups that can affect Europe, can affect the United States,” she said. “Jihadist groups are governing territory. They will never stay there, though. They are driven to expand. Their raison d’etre is to be against the West, against the Crusaders, against the fill-in-the-blank—and we all fit into one of these categories. How do we try to contain that? I’m thinking a lot about containment, deterrence, and defeat.”
The dangers posed, perfectly and succinctly put.
In 2008 after the candidates were down to John McCain, Obama and Hillary I knew we were fucked and supported Hillary. I was quite sure Obama would be worse than Carter for the economy and for international relations. So far, I have seen no reason whatever to change that calculation.
I thought McCain would be terrible and would institute Democrat-sponsored legislation for which Republicans would be blamed.
I supported Hillary because I knew she would have a loyal opposition in elected office and in the press. I am quite sure she would have been a failure. But she would have been less effective in passing horrible legislation that retards economic growth than has been President Obama.
If we're lucky in 2016 there will be somebody to choose because of positive attributes instead of calculations about who suck the least. Hillary can only be a "sucks the least" winner. Nothing about her speaks to her great skill at anything.
Ann Althouse said:
"The message is, of course, that she would do it better, and I observe a distinct but deniable message that she as a woman would do it better..."
Communists always say they will do it better this time, not like the last time when that guy Obama was effing things up.
Hillary will do nothing different except maybe to put pink drapes in a new gulag.
Why is there even any question about this?
And what bullshit about her worrying about the jihadists, and the Syrian rebels, who she's describing as middle of the roaders. What effing road is she talking about.
PB Reader said, "She's unfit for office," which sums it up nicely.
I suggest a reading of, The Law by Frederic Bastiat for everyone of the commenters of this blog, and while you're doing that I'll say three more Hail Marys for you.
Mr. Meigs, once the reins were handed to the boomers?
Correlation is not causation.
Again, not to be too big on Hillary, and I am definitely not (my point is like Lydia's), but another thing that makes me open to the idea of her as president are the "effing" this and "drapes in a new gulag" that.God, it's so tiring.
"I’m thinking a lot about containment, deterrence, and defeat.”
Nice to know she has a plan, and it sounds like it should work. A nation deploying containment and deterrence against terrorists with nuclear weapons can expect to encounter some defeat.
Mrs Clinton has no wisdom, has no leadership ability and is dumb as a rock on all subjects other than her own money stash. The first woman President should be better than that.
Maybe an Iowa pig farmer could run things. The price of bacon needs strong cutting edge leadership.
Oh, look there. We now have Jon Burack to tell us his deep concerns about things. How pleasant.
Soros ain't gettin' his money's worth.
Here's the headline from Yahoo;
"Clinton blames Islamic militants rise on Obama policies".
Heh. Stuck it in, twisted it, and broke it off in the wound. Likable enough indeed!
Crack sez: "My political views, steeped in our history and culture, are too nuanced for most to grasp..."
Nuanced like "Fork over the money, whitey."
Nuanced.
How is it those desperately sought Rose Law Firm billing records suddenly appeared in the White House residence?
Why is someone credibly involved in obstruction of justice, being seriously considered as a presidential candidate?
More proof that we're an idiocracy right here in the comments. People are ready to vote for this sociopath because she mouths a few seemingly reasonable statements, even after all the the scandals, graft, obstructions, lies, and tantrums.
Even after standing by the caskets of those slain in the Bengazi attacks and telling the deceased's families to their faces she was gonna get that bastard that made that film...
You people are insane.
This country is insane.
We're fucked.
I was hoping that when she is on vacation that we would get a vacation from her incoherent remarks. unlike Ann I can't hear gender based dog whistles.
Jon Burack, I said pink drapes in a new gulag. Effing moron.
On a positive note, our new overlords may kill you last, for your support of Hillary and her ilk.
---Not when the main qualification's passing the "Is this a racist?" test.
Six posts and we get a Crack winner. I think Hillary should show us how she can fix Detroit first.
Hillary seems grateful to be one of the strong women in Obama's life; and successfully characterizing failure as success just proves how ready she is for the big show.
If you saw the Drudge photos of Hillary on the beach, you would conclude either she is not running for president or it is just further proof of what her ineptness as a politician.
One of my big problems with Hillary is that everything out of her mouth (at least when she does not mess up and tell her true feelings) is so politically calculated. My other problem is that she has never accomplished anything of significance and is very unlikely to suddenly get good if entrusted with the job of president.
I will concede her criticism of Obama's don't do stupid stuff was smart, although almost certainly also politically calculated.
I'm with Paul. I am appalled that anyone can consider this talented-man's-Wife as a contender for the Presidency.
Watch the video again of, "what difference, at this point, does it make?" If that isn't a perfect example of breathless female avoidance that no True Presidential material could ever fathom, I don't know what to say.
T. Rellis is right. When Hillary was Sec. of State she wanted the US to support ISIS with cash and arms. She was attracted to them for two reasons. First ISIS was on the outs with Al Qaeda and that automatically made them moderates. And second, ISIS believed in diversity: their fighters were from all over world-- Europe, the United States, England, the Arab countries and elsewhere--and that made them progressives.
Progressive moderates fighting Assad--this was the answer to all of her liberal dreams.
If she ever is elected president, the smart money is on ISIS conning her a second time.
JFK, Romney and Obama have been the subject of pretty good beach photos while running for President. JFK's was the best by a good margin.
Mrs. Clinton should avoid the temptation of joining this trend ever again.
It was not for nothing that Drudge captioned his link "Hillary Beached."
PB Reader said...
She's unfit for office.
Definitely not fit, that's for sure. She should work on that if she's going to run for President. It's exhausting work.
Hillary helped arm the terrorists in Syria. It blew up in her face and she coldly lied over her 'friend', Ambassader Steven's casket and continued to lie and cover up.
Now these same terrorists are blazing through the middle east committing atrocities and she's talking about containing them? Seeing as how her assistant's family belong to the muslim brotherhood (whose mission is to bring about the caliphate) seems there is a glaring conflict on top of it all.
Regarding Israel, didn't she say in her book that they were the problem?
While Hillary does plan to use enough gender cards during the 2016 campaign to fill all the casinos on The Strip in Vegas, I don't think her attacking the last two presidents is so much male-bashing as it is trying to position herself away from her time as Obama's Secretary of State and towards her time as First Lady with Bill.
She sees the current world and national situation, sees the president's poll numbers and wants to be proactive about making sure the public doesn't see her candidacy as a de facto third term for Obama, but instead as a third term for Bill. And she certainly can't bash Obama's foreign policy and be nice to Bush in any way, because the progressive wing of the Democratic Party already is chomping at the bit for Liz Warren to challenge her in the primaries.
So Hillary's attacking the last two male presidents, but she's going to embrace her husband's legacy as much as possible. So it's situational male-bashing mixed with the same "Stand By Your Man" ethos she had to assume during the 1992 campaign. Except here she's standing by her man to make people forget she ever stood by the current guy in the White House and his foreign policy.
It's amazing to me, given Hillary's long history of lies and corruption, that anyone would ignore them all because they think she may have said the right thing.
Miss Champion of women laughing over getting a child rapist off with a lighter sentence. Blaming the child like she later blamed and attacked her husband's victims.
All the corruption between then and becoming SoS and helping to arm violent terrorists who treat women worse than goats. Hillary only wants to enrich Hillary. Her ideology, agenda, and history of failure are the same as Obama's. They are twins. But she is the meaner of the two, as it relates domestically unless you pay her off, like Obama.
Hillary, you want to impress me? Take responsibility for JUST ONE of your fuck ups, like Bengazi.
Because I don't think any of us can handle another 4 years of "it depends on the def of is" and "vast right conspiracy squawk!"
Seriously, can anyone name one accomplishment of this women? Other than marrying Bill Clinton.
"Why is someone credibly involved in obstruction of justice, being seriously considered as a presidential candidate?"
Because she's a woman. We hold them to a lower standard. Can't be responsible for their reproductive choices, can't even buy their own birth control.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा