Hillary, a real fraud . . .
David Brooks, that ever helpful shill, continues to provide timely advice to democrats for not losing the election. He's remarkably in tune with the notion that Hillary has it in the bag and that she needs to stay the course as a conservative on foreign matters. Only he thinks Hillary is for real, not pretending to be a hawk:
http://www.tiny.cc/WGdFI
There you have it. The putative shoe-in for Pres is either a for real hawk, or a hypocrite in hawk's clothing. Ain’t we lucky.
Some seem to feel that Hillary is just posturing to get elected, and will do the "right thing" once in office:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002381.php
To me, it is the slimmest of hopes, that a politician will conclusively reject a position and a bent that is established during a campaign once they are in office. I understand that politicians frequently change direction, though seldom totally reverse course. But to premise one’s forgiveness on just such a hopeful turnabout is a position of utter weakness and lack of honesty.
IF Hillary could read the scene, AND summon the courage to be forthright and honest, she would recognize the vast opposition to more belligerency in the Middle East. Americans have tired of the enterprise.
It is a nasty trap to appear, genuinely or not, to hew the neo line while campaigning, the corollary of which is that the US stays in Iraq and environs for the foreseeable future, while seeking to distance oneself from Bush on technical grounds.
Iraq is a not primarily a disaster on technical grounds. It is a strategic and moral failure.
Hillary can’t credibly hope to criticize the policy and decisions that got us here while adopting the scenario that the architects project into the future.
I say she can’t, but I recognize that hypocrisy can twist itself in all sorts of ways.
http://www.tiny.cc/WGdFI
There you have it. The putative shoe-in for Pres is either a for real hawk, or a hypocrite in hawk's clothing. Ain’t we lucky.
Some seem to feel that Hillary is just posturing to get elected, and will do the "right thing" once in office:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002381.php
To me, it is the slimmest of hopes, that a politician will conclusively reject a position and a bent that is established during a campaign once they are in office. I understand that politicians frequently change direction, though seldom totally reverse course. But to premise one’s forgiveness on just such a hopeful turnabout is a position of utter weakness and lack of honesty.
IF Hillary could read the scene, AND summon the courage to be forthright and honest, she would recognize the vast opposition to more belligerency in the Middle East. Americans have tired of the enterprise.
It is a nasty trap to appear, genuinely or not, to hew the neo line while campaigning, the corollary of which is that the US stays in Iraq and environs for the foreseeable future, while seeking to distance oneself from Bush on technical grounds.
Iraq is a not primarily a disaster on technical grounds. It is a strategic and moral failure.
Hillary can’t credibly hope to criticize the policy and decisions that got us here while adopting the scenario that the architects project into the future.
I say she can’t, but I recognize that hypocrisy can twist itself in all sorts of ways.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home