Isn't it more important to examine the policies of the Clinton's than read these Biographies?

[KoKo]

Rather than looking into her soul, examine her childhood ...I'd rather judge her by her years as First Lady and Governor's wife.

What policies did she support? What did she do at Rose Law Firm BESIDES represent companies that some here don't like (Walmart). As US First Lady what was her health care plan, in reality, without the Repug spin. What did she and Bill accomplish in eight years that made America better,(since there's good evidence they were a team)? Was Hillary more "DLC" than Bill was? Was Bill a more "FDR Dem" than Hillary who was a "converted Goldwater Republican," or were their thoughts on policy identical?

What is her stand on Free Trade, NAFTA,CAFTA and job outsourcing? Would she revise NAFTA to take into consideration the criticisms of it for Chapter 14 and workers rights and environment. What is her feeling about Globilization? What about considering Re-Regulation of some of our SEC Regulations that the Clintons worked with Dems to reduce that helped lead to Bubble Economies?

So many questions.... but we get books peering into Hillary's soul asking who she really is.
It's a distraction from what kind of President she wants to be and where Bill will fit into the whole equation. :shrug:

[Totally Committed]

1. Now you're talking! I am no great fan of Hillary, for sure, but....

these biographies are just sensational hearsay and gossip about stuff that shouldn't matter, anyway. Either we respect NEWS over INFOTAINMENT or we don't. Either we want to make our decisions on facts or on some unnamed sources's say-so.

I damned well want to know what she thinks about Free Trade, NAFTA,CAFTA and job outsourcing. I also want to hear her try to defend the Welfare Reform Act.

TC

[AtomicKitten]

3. besides keeping up with the Paris gossip is already time-consuming :)

And I too want to hear the fine details of proposed policy, not who she is or is not shtupping nor a tattle-tale piece exposing a bad hair day.

[Totally Committed]

4. It's the stupidest thing...

I don't understand why anyone would want to focus on these books instead of what's on our plates right in front of us!

Does it go into her thought process on the IWR, and her statements which seem to back continuing the war now? Does it tell us what her issues are NOW? I would bet none of them does.

I wish this country would go back to choosing a president based on what he/she has planned for this country instead of gossip and innuendo. It's brought us nothing but misery. Also, selfishly, I believe once people actually DO see what's on Hillary's mind, she won't be anywhere near the front-runner anymore. Just HOW far right has she triangulated??? Harold Ford said that there is no room to the Right of her in this Party. If that's so, people need to know that.

Whatever, I'm all INFOTAINMENTED out. Instead of reading these books, read Al's new book -- it's very good. And, it tells you where he's at right here and now.

TC

[AtomicKitten]

5. read it and I am a moonie in his camp :)

I believe now more than ever that anyone that enabled this administration in any way, shape, or form should be disqualified from running for president. I really, truly believe that. And no subterfuge the infotainment folks can come up with changes that.

[Totally Committed]

7. But, how will we ever know how if or how much she "enabled" the administration

if we're too busy reading about whether or not she schtupped Vince Foster or whether or not she and Bill have a "real" marriage today, or any of that C-R-A-P.

I want the truth from her (like we're ever gonna get the REAL truth from any candidate, but you know what I mean...). I want to know why she thinks that, despite belonging to a faction of this Party that has nothing but disrespect and derision for it's base, she deserves my vote. Or, your vote. Or anyone's vote in this Party.

She can't do it if we're all arguing about personal minutia.

TC

[ElizabethDC]

2. I agree wholeheartedly

these books are just being written for money, I think. Policy should be much more important than whether or not Hillary had an affair with Vince Foster, but the MSM loves juicy gossip.

As for NAFTA and CAFTA, Hillary voted against CAFTA and was not a big proponent of NAFTA (she advised Bill not to focus on it). Today she spoke out against a proposed U.S.-Korea trade pact (link: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/06/09/hillary_clinton_slams_proposed_us_korea_trade_pact/)

[question everything]

6. Completely agree

I wondered whether any political candidate has ever been so thoroughly searched and analyzed besides the Clintons.

[sandnsea]

8. People vote on character

I think we might want to individually consider that as we move forward. Whoever the candidate is, we have to start thinking about how to translate policy into character attibutes. That's how people think and we aren't going to change that.

[KoKo]

9. But look at "Selection 2000?" Did we vote on "character" in that selection?

:shrug: Whose character? Most of what Bush II was about (following the Bush I ...One term Presidency.

Al Gore was running on a history with a father who had been a long term Senator and he had a voting record and a record as Vice President. But...when it came down to it ....what happened.

Does "character" really count? Does Media Manipulation and corrupt voting machines and voter disenfranchisement kind of cancel it all out?

What the Repugs have been "Masters AT" is working on ALL FRONTS to disenfranchise Democrats. A few Corporations now own ALL THE MAJOR PUBLISHING OUTLETS...so they can pick and choose info they publish and we know that Five Companies own the Rest of our TV/INTERNET/CABLE/SATELLITE companies.

AND...the NY Stock Exchange is now going to become the GLOBAL STOCK EXCHANGE because a "WORLD STOCK EXCHANGE" is considered to be a Vital part of Golbiliztion. That folks all over the world should be able to TRADE on ONE EXCHANGE and not have these "nationalist stock exchanges" that only rely on one particular countries OWN STOCK MARKET.

THESE ARE THE PRESSING ISSUES....Not Hillary's Soul or Mitt Romney's "broad shoulders and greying sidburns, or Giuliani's "tough guy politics." :shrug:

Times are TOUGH....and we focus on trivialities when the RECORDS of these people is available from a simple "GOOGLE SEARCH."

[sandnsea]

10. More people voted for Gore

So people trusted his character. The Democratic Party made the mistake of letting Sore Loserman stick, instead of reminding people on a regular basis that Gore won the popular vote.

In 2003, it wasn't until people started getting a sense of Kerry's character that they started moving to vote for him. People have to trust that a person has a core set of values, before they'll begin the process of deciding how much those values line up with their own - and what those values look like in policy.

[blm]

11. I care about whether or not she will continue the protection of BushInc or open the books

the way a democracy needs.

THAT is the question the entire corporate media won't dare discuss.

[KoKo]

12. I'm waiting for the first Dem to stand up and say "Corruption of US Government Has Gone TOO FAR!

and "THIS is what I'm going to do about it!

I think Kucinich would say it...but no one would listen. And, because the prevailing opinion is "that no one would listen" then No One will speak out. :shrug:

[Zensea]

13. Makes sense as long as you apply the same standard to Republicans.

Not a comment on what you personally do but a comment on how a lot of people are perfectly happy to dig into the biographies of creatures from the Republican side of things (for example George Bush's time at Yale and just afterwards) to suss out their present character and actions.

[KoKo]

14. We have alot of Republican record on their policies, though. Bush's Governorship

provided much about what he thought on issues. And, his father's administration and the family he came from had a record of "policy" from papers and written reports at the time.

So, if we focus on policy it's helpfull for both Dems and Republicans. :shrug: