Arianna Huffington thinks Hilary mis-speaks
She thinks judging by Hilary's appeance on "Inside Politics" Hilary fails her limus test for the 2008 Democratic nominee: someone who can utter, in plain English, an unambiguous, unequivocal sentence about Iraq. For the record, here's the Huffington blog post:
I reckon even discounting the black-box balloting systems effect, there isn't a single one of these "I-refuse-to stand-for-anything-controversial-I-may-be-required-to-defend-Democrats are going to win the next Presidential race. Not one, not Hilary Clinton nor anybody else, Iraq strategy/clarity or not. Dems must recognize what Bush & Co have done, before they engage in electoral/political battle.
A GW Bush aide once said something to Ron Suskind that Democrats don't seem to get, and that is: they create their own reality. The context was empire-related, but I contend it applies domestically too. It sounds like sheer madness to us reality-based folk, but it couldn't be more true.
The 'reality' that GWB & Co have created is one of (perceived) principled/moral leadership: saying what you mean, meaning what you say, in plain/faulty English. Facts, truth, and science (all reality-based notions) be damned. His "would I lie to you? I am a C-student; I'm not a DC politician. real politicians are elitist haters" facade, is the biggest swindle of our political times. But there is a demand for honest, straight-talking politicians and GWB is cashing in, fraudulently albeit.
The fact that he is a fraud doesn't change anything, he has "created a reality" of the ultimate truth-teller. Worse, he has made other polished politicians look like lying, elitist, double-speaking-stand-for-nothing careerists who just wanna get elected.
Hilary Clinton/John Kerry/ANOther could have an clear Iraq strategy or not, it makes no difference she/he are still double-speaking-stand-for-nothing careerists who just wanna get elected. That's the challenge, rightly or wrongly, that's the "created reality." Show me one Democrat who can win this.
On a related note, the other day GWB said,
"in my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." It doesn't matter if he's lying; if he says it enough times, Bob's your uncle, it's reality (created naturally). Witness, America is a liberal democracy, and yet "liberals" are public enemy No.1. Created realities.
How quickly can Dems supplant this reality? Or, who can mold him/herself seamlessly into it? Not Hilary Clinton, not John Kerry either. In fact, in the current climate/reality even Bill Clinton would lose, IMHO. Dems need to think/act very differently about defeating the current crop of Repubs; litmus tests on Iraq, while okay, are reality-based approaches; don't expect them to win us anything.
========================================
Full quote from RON SUSKIND, Without a Doubt, NYT Magazine: "That's not the way the world really works anymore... We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Judy Woodruff asked a very specific question: “Record numbers of Americans continue to die in Iraq. No end to the violence in sight that most people can see. When should the United States begin significant troop withdrawals?”
Hillary reacted like a vampire being shown a cross or an ABC executive seeing the ratings for their Trump TV movie… then offered up the following head scratcher:
You know, I am not one who feels comfortable setting exit strategies. We don't know what we're exiting from. We don't know what the situation is moving toward…. How do we know where we're headed, when we don't know where we are?
Wow. Very existential. Very Zen koan. If a foreign policy disintegrates in the desert and no one hears it fail, what does this mean for our country and for our safety?
Do you hear that? It’s the sound of one Greek gagging. Senator Clinton, if you are not “comfortable setting exit strategies”, can you direct us to someone who is? Because our soldiers are dying every day waiting for someone who is comfortable setting an exit strategy.
I’ve just decided that I do have a litmus test for the 2008 Democratic nominee: someone who can utter, in plain English, an unambiguous, unequivocal sentence about Iraq.
I reckon even discounting the black-box balloting systems effect, there isn't a single one of these "I-refuse-to stand-for-anything-controversial-I-may-be-required-to-defend-Democrats are going to win the next Presidential race. Not one, not Hilary Clinton nor anybody else, Iraq strategy/clarity or not. Dems must recognize what Bush & Co have done, before they engage in electoral/political battle.
A GW Bush aide once said something to Ron Suskind that Democrats don't seem to get, and that is: they create their own reality. The context was empire-related, but I contend it applies domestically too. It sounds like sheer madness to us reality-based folk, but it couldn't be more true.
The 'reality' that GWB & Co have created is one of (perceived) principled/moral leadership: saying what you mean, meaning what you say, in plain/faulty English. Facts, truth, and science (all reality-based notions) be damned. His "would I lie to you? I am a C-student; I'm not a DC politician. real politicians are elitist haters" facade, is the biggest swindle of our political times. But there is a demand for honest, straight-talking politicians and GWB is cashing in, fraudulently albeit.
The fact that he is a fraud doesn't change anything, he has "created a reality" of the ultimate truth-teller. Worse, he has made other polished politicians look like lying, elitist, double-speaking-stand-for-nothing careerists who just wanna get elected.
Hilary Clinton/John Kerry/ANOther could have an clear Iraq strategy or not, it makes no difference she/he are still double-speaking-stand-for-nothing careerists who just wanna get elected. That's the challenge, rightly or wrongly, that's the "created reality." Show me one Democrat who can win this.
On a related note, the other day GWB said,
"in my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." It doesn't matter if he's lying; if he says it enough times, Bob's your uncle, it's reality (created naturally). Witness, America is a liberal democracy, and yet "liberals" are public enemy No.1. Created realities.
How quickly can Dems supplant this reality? Or, who can mold him/herself seamlessly into it? Not Hilary Clinton, not John Kerry either. In fact, in the current climate/reality even Bill Clinton would lose, IMHO. Dems need to think/act very differently about defeating the current crop of Repubs; litmus tests on Iraq, while okay, are reality-based approaches; don't expect them to win us anything.
========================================
Full quote from RON SUSKIND, Without a Doubt, NYT Magazine: "That's not the way the world really works anymore... We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
posted by knikik at 7:11 PM
<< Home