…blogging thing for far too long: our collective cynicism about declarative statements made by politicians has evolved into a beautiful, elegant flowering plant. Case in point: Ann came up with a perfectly easy way to turn…
Q- Would you like to be president of the United States?
No
…into a “Yeah, I’m running” later on. Continue reading #RSRH Althouse, Geraghty, and I have been doing this…
Via Hot Air, este reportaje que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos va a llevar a las cortes el estado de Arizona sobre la Ley SB1070 de imigrantes ilegales. Aparentemente la Casa Blanca decidió primero divulgar esta noticia a los ecuatorianos, como parte de la visita de la Secretaria de Estado Hillary Clinton a Ecuador; por lo tanto es adecuado reportarlo en español. Depués de todo, no es como si la administración de Obama tenga antecedente ninguno de hablar claro en inglés*.
Thanks to Fausta for the translation: also check out her conversation with IBD’s Monica Showalter on Hillary Clinton being friendly with Ecuadorean President Correa in the first place. That the American electorate rejects the idea of a federal challenge to the law by a two-to-one ratio is irrelevant to this administration, of course; given their tendency to mistake a tin ear for principles, that’s hardly surprising. If Rasmussen put out a poll demonstrating that most Republicans and independents oppose the practice of people hitting each other in the groin, it’s highly likely that the White House would react by endorsing it for the 2010 midterms…
Moe Lane
…because let me add my voice to that of Instapundit’s, Riehl World View’s, and Reason’s: this ad from 2008 is fraught with irony in 2010.
Fraught. “Hey! Let’s take the image of someone talking about having a dialogue with the country and calling for the support of the populace AND SMASH HER IN THE FACE WITH A HAMMER! Because that would be different.”
Moe Lane
PS: On the bright side, the phrase ‘leader principle’ appears nowhere in this portrayal of American society as a grim, corporatist wasteland requiring violent intervention in order to create a new and superior singular collective identity.
Overtly.
Crossposted to RedState.
That’s what the Telegraph thinks, at least. Hard to say whether the British paper’s distance from the situation help or hurts its judgment, but they’ve found an interesting poll:
A recent poll by the Clarus Research Group found that Hillary Clinton had a 75 per cent approval rating compared to 51 per cent for the man who defeated her in their epic battle for the Democratic nomination.
[snip]
The woman who was one of the most polarising figures in American politics now has a glowing 65 per cent approval rating among Independents and healthy 57 per cent among Republicans.
Even sworn enemies on the Right marvelled at her toughness in refusing to concede to Obama until the bitter end in the summer of 2008 and now view her as more hawkish than the president.
(Poll here: H/T Hot Air Headlines.) Just off the top of my head: being ‘more hawkish than the president’ isn’t exactly hard, and while the VRWC is sympathetic towards the way that her primary opponent’s campaign apparatus used a largely gender-based attack strategy against her last year I predict that said sympathy will evaporate like dew in August if she ever becomes the Democratic nominee for President*. That may not matter, given that a 65% approval rating among independent voters (almost double that of her boss) is enough to make any thoughtful politician stop with her coffee cup halfway to her lips.
Lastly: man, aside from SecState Clinton and Bush appointee SecDef Gates, those are wretched numbers for independent voters across the board. Although VP Biden’s are arguably just ‘awful.’
Moe Lane
*Nothing personal, Madame Secretary. Strictly business.
Crossposted to Moe Lane.
WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton says running for office isn’t on her “radar,” but she still has an eight-person political team and sports two overflowing campaign war chests.
Her team transformed the former Democratic White House contender’s massive campaign debts into a $3 million mountain of political cash, according to federal fund-raising records through the end of June.
[snip]
By comparison, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is up for reelection next year, had just three people on staff last quarter.
Via Andrew Malcolm, who likewise finds this fascinating. Also, before you ask: Clinton was and is not allowed to pay herself back for the money she lent her own campaign. That’s gone forever. Continue reading SecState Clinton has 3 million in war chest.
While linking to Marielena Zuniga’s editorial “Palin bashing is women bashing,” Glenn Reynolds also responded with the sarcastic-when-he-says it comment “Don’t be silly. She’s not a woman, she’s a Republican.” While this is a rebuttal which quite succinctly gets to the heart of the matter, I feel obligated to expand on it a little. To put it bluntly: there was no point to this editorial, which uses Governor Palin and former Senator/current SecState Clinton as examples of how badly the media treats inconvenient women in politics. It was pointless because conservatives already knew and liberals don’t particularly care, which means that the people who would most take this editorial to heart are the least likely to have needed it, and vice versa.
I had a few paragraphs more, but it can be summed up as such: the larger problem will persist until feminists get sick of being the aphids in the Democrats’ anthill. So I’ll spare you more pontification.
Crossposted to RedState.
It’ll clearly happen after a dramatic breaking with the administration this fall over foreign policy.
Clearly.
Bill Clinton to raise money for NY Dem challenger
WASHINGTON – In a slap at President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton will headline a fundraiser for a New York congresswoman challenging White House-backed Sen. Kristen Gillibrand in the state’s Democratic primary.
Clinton has not endorsed in the race, but his efforts to help Rep. Carolyn Maloney could be seen as a snub to Gillibrand and the Obama White House. Matt McKenna, a spokesman for Clinton, said he will be attending a July 20 fundraiser in New York.
(H/T: Hot Air)
Hey, it’s as good an answer as any other, right? Personally, I’d consider Clinton a trade-up, myself.
Moe Lane
Crossposted to RedState.
Speaking as an actual Brandybuck: Oh, really?
I somehow suspect that Pravda didn’t really want me to get the reaction that I did from reading this:
Hillary Clinton as the US Secretary of State will not change anything. The color of the skin does not change the essence of aggressive politics. She definitely enjoys great respect in the United States as a woman who returned to big politics after the infamous scandal with her husband. Unlike Condoleezza Rice, Clinton has a more subtle perception of the moment. She realizes that life is not based on the American dream but follows a completely different motto: “We either swim or drown.”
Continue reading “Hillary Clinton to bring four years of war as Secretary of State”
