Hillary, no longer reality based?
I just read the interview with Keith Olberman that occurred just before the Pennsylvania primary. Hillary’s attack ad tells us she is the one who should answer the phone at three in the morning. But she has very different memories of going to Tuzla than every one else there. There was no fire fight.
Now in her interview with Mr. Olberman she threatens to nuke Iran. OK, first of all, it is a very stupid question. Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, is not trying to produce a nuclear weapon. But Senator Clinton then displayed astounding ignorance, she said she does not want Iran to become the sole nuclear power in the Middle East. Please excuse me Senator Clinton, but Israel has some 200 nukes, and Pakistan has at least 30. All quite deliverable.
She is showing the same hysterical ignorance of that pack of running dogs that got us into two unsolvable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. What I would expect of a true Presidential candidate is ideas on how to get us out of the mess, not trying to out rhetoric the running dogs.
Posted: April 23rd, 2008 under Afghanistan, Hillary, Iran, Iraq.
Comments: 3
Comments
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: April 24, 2008, 12:17 am
At the risk of seeming like a Hillary apologist (I’m not), I’m not so sure that your analysis is correct. Part of the success of US policy in the Middle East until the debacle at Lebanon was the fact the US remained aggressively neutral. For example, we armed both Israel and the Saudis. Our approach was deliberately unpredictable, which kept both sides of the conflict in check and dependent. When we lost that balance, we started to lose our footing in the region.
Reckless as Hillary sounds, it harkens back to the earlier era, where we were capable of anything, arming (or threatening) both sides of the conflict. As much as I am non-violent and an advocate for diplomacy, it just doesn’t seem to take in the Mid-East. Presidents, the UN, the Israelis and Arab nations have tried to work this out for more than 60 years to no avail. Perhaps Clinton is in the process reestablishing the only approach that seems to work. Then again, she might be as ignorant as you state…
Comment from josh
Time: April 24, 2008, 11:26 am
Hillary doesn’t need reality when she has so much voodoo working for her. On the home front she is claiming that she has a larger popular vote than Obama. She gets at these numbers by counting Florida and Michigan and by discounting about 200,000 voters in selected caucus states because they were not “one man, one vote” states, or in her case, “one woman, one vote” states.
She has the old politics working just fine and we know that old politics is not reality based. See presidents 41, 42, and 43.
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 24, 2008, 4:46 pm
Yes, the new counting method cracked me up. It excludes all the caucuses but includes Michigan where nobody else was on the ballot. I still say that those Clintons overestimate their intelligence.
Write a comment