HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Politics & Government » Populist Reform of the Democratic Party (Group) » Let the "Fun" B...

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:20 PM

 

Let the "Fun" Begin

Last edited Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:06 PM - Edit history (2)

The Daily Beast:
Jackie Kucinich
Will Rahn
03.19.15




The last time we saw Clinton, she was on the defensive about her use of personal email at the State Department. On Thursday, addressing a room of happy campers, she was all sunshine.

America, meet fun Hillary.

A newly relaxed, approachable, and somewhat amusing Clinton was on full display Thursday at the American Camp Association’s Tri-State Conference in Atlantic City, where she gave what could be her last paid speech before launching a presidential campaign.

And first policy prescription for the room full of happy campers, before a veiled shot at the current Democratic president?

Have more fun.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/19/fun-hillary-is-here-to-make-you-forget-those-e-mails.html


Lets pass quickly over the anecdotes that Hillary thinks are fun (camping, her age) and make two observation:

First
"Fun Hillary" is an obvious attempt to take control of the narrative and switch the media focus away from "Risky Hillary" (comes complete with her own Yahoo email account, and special Kung-Fu Email-Deleting Grip!).

I'm not so concerned with the facts about the email issue itself, I'm concerned with the manner in which Hillary handles the media's perception of this issue. What Hillary does with her little email troubles speaks to her effectiveness as a campaigner, which, we are often told, is one of her strengths. . Her competency and her diplomatic skills are her major selling points. If she's viewed as someone who takes unnecessary risks with matters affecting our national security, she's toast.

Clinton could have went for "Bold" but she didn't. She could have owned the email issue and embraced the fact that she deleted emails with a comment like "Damn straight I deleted some emails - does America want her National Security issues floating around the Internet?" That's how Republicans would have dealt with the story...DARE anyone to challenge them on it. But she didn't.

Instead, Clinton went for "Fun." She was warmish, nearly fuzzy, and somewhat self-deprecating, and though she's never been as folksy as Bill, she was trying. I don't think she hurt herself, but I doubt she helped herself either, because she didn't change the narrative. She joked about her age. How does that inspire confidence again?

Second
Clinton's answers to policy questions tell us more about how she'll act as President than as a campaigner. That's valuable. Let's go back to what Clinton said:

But the real fun began when she started talking about the political environment in Washington. Using camp metaphors, of course.

“The red cabin and the blue cabin have to come together and actually listen to each other. Wouldn’t that be a novel idea?” she said. “Sort of create this much more open dialog opportunity which I would like to see more of in this country.”

Later she stressed the importance of building relationships with the other side of the political aisle.

“I don’t think there is any substitute for building relationships, I just don’t,” she said.

Left unspoken was how the head counselor of the blue cabin has been routinely criticized for failing to forge a bond with the campers in the red cabin.

She also painted a rosy picture of Bill Clinton’s relationship with Newt Gingrich when the latter was House speaker, saying Gingrich would come over to the White House to hash out policies out with the president after he was done trashing them in public. They got stuff done. Politics, she stressed, is for people who know how to talk and compromise, and the red cabin talked to the blue cabin when the Clinton's were in charge.


So. Clinton wants to compromise with the Red Cabin? Really?

Has she NOT been paying attention to all the obstruction over the last 7 years, or is Clinton just hard wired to try to find a way to make Democrats more aligned with Conservatives? That doesn't sound very progressive to me. Doesn't sound "fun" either.

Maybe Hillary thinks there'll be compromise on both sides. If so, then I ask again: has she NOT been paying attention to all the obstruction over the last 7 years?

Remember her words: "Politics is for people who know how to talk and compromise, and the red cabin talked to the blue cabin when the Clinton's were in charge."

Indeed.

Let the "Fun" Begin.

7 replies, 1537 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to demwing (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 07:26 PM

1. I want to know exactly WHAT Clinton (or any other bipartisan fetishist) is willing to compromise.

 

What platforms, positions, and principles are "on the table" for a trim or even full annulment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:00 PM

2. You just remember that they "got stuff done"

 

Don't think about what stuff, just think about the fact that it got done.

Politics is for people who know how to talk and compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:31 PM

3. NAFTA, wall street deregulation, dumping people into extreme poverty as part of welfare

"reform" Yeah, they got things done.

I updated my love post for Hillary. Gingrich would be flattered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Original post)

Sat Mar 21, 2015, 08:41 PM

4. It must be "fun" getting paid $200k a speech

SRSLY, WTF?

The middle-class is circling the drain.
The middle east is on fire.
The Ukraine is about to erupt.
and on and on...
but girls just want to have fun???

She seems more and more like
she's looking for an exit?
Is she trying to divide the Democratic party
with this "play nice" with the right-wing?
Or is she signaling to "The Family" that she's their girl?

I can't tell if she's...
a) giving the Democratic left a middle finger?
b) she campaigning to be a right-wing appeaser?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 08:52 AM

5. Fear the oligarchy puppet show.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 11:50 AM

6. What you say, here, is what most concerns me and probably many others...

Like the way you expressed her vulnerability in how she handles issues with example of with how she probably handled her role as "SOS." Look at what the State Department has done since she was in charge. The ME is in flames and while we can blame Bush for starting and continuing this...all hell has broken out since she was in charge of State. The Bush "hold overs" like Victoria Nuland and others should have been shown the door and seasoned people that Bush through out should have been brought back. Instead there are reports she spent much of her time at State being an Ambassador for Free Trade in her many trips to other countries supposedly talking up Freedom and Democracy while her eye wasn't on what was going on in critical areas of the MENA. Maybe the MIC has such total control that the State Department has no voice or power...but, that shows that something is terribly wrong in DC and we need quick reform.


Foreign Policy management has been terrible under this State Department as things have rocketed out of control in ME and we are now going to elect another "War President" since we have ongoing, unending Military Actions from ME to Africa and now a new cold war with Russia. This is under Democratic Control...and we are now as culpable as the Republicans for starting and continuing actions of Regime Change which have been a disaster. The Repubs will be worse if elected....but, how can we look at Hillary to appoint Cabinet Members and State Department Personnel that are any different from Obama's choices? And, HER choices if different could possibly be worse if she is not a competent manager, used to allowing others to handle things for her and she takes "unnecessary risks" which has been her pattern.

As you said:


I'm not so concerned with the facts about the email issue itself, I'm concerned with the manner in which Hillary handles the media's perception of this issue. What Hillary does with her little email troubles speaks to her effectiveness as a campaigner, which, we are often told, is one of her strengths. . Her competency and her diplomatic skills are her major selling points. If she's viewed as someone who takes unnecessary risks with matters affecting our national security, she's toast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Original post)

Sun Mar 22, 2015, 04:23 PM

7. I felt the same about President Obama.

When he spoke of compromise with Republicans and looking forward I thought to myself, "Didn't he witness the Republicans in the 1990s and the insane way they went after the Clintons?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread