Pander Bear Hillary - Linda Chavez

[Joanie Baloney]

-Cross posted from Editorials and Other articles-

(Chavez writes a nationally syndicated column and is the author of “An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal.”)


Hillary Clinton may be pulling away from the pack of Democratic contenders, but she's still playing it safe. She's quick to stake out territory that puts her in the mainstream of Democratic opinion, even if it means disavowing her own past positions – or those of her husband.

This week, Sen. Clinton deftly danced around the trade issue during a debate sponsored by the AFL-CIO. To hear her talk about it, you'd think the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA (which removed barriers and tariffs for products traded among the United States, Mexico and Canada), was a Republican plot to destroy American jobs.

In reality, NAFTA was one of President Bill Clinton's few genuine achievements during his eight-year tenure. Like all the other Democratic candidates, Sen. Clinton was eager to disavow NAFTA before the 17,000 union members gathered in Chicago's Soldier Field.

-snip-

Sen. Clinton tried to cast herself as a fighter in the AFL-CIO debate, drawing hearty applause when she noted, “For 15 years, I have stood up against the right-wing machine, and I've come out stronger. So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl.”

But in Soldier Field, home of the Chicago Bears, Sen. Clinton looked more like a Pander Bear than a principled politician. I guess she's more worried about losing the AFL-CIO's fat contribution to her campaign next fall – in 2004, the AFL-CIO spent $44 million to try to elect John Kerry – than she is about doing what's right for the economy and American families.





http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070812/news_m...

Wow - what say the Hillary supporters?

JB

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Isn't that from Counterpunch?

Just askin'.

--p!

[Joanie Baloney]

2. Hmmm...

Don't know - Counterpunch wasn't referenced. Do you have a link to that?

JB

[Me.]

3. Hill Not My Candidate

But Chavez is well known as a water carrier for the republcons. She keeps selling herself as an ex-liberal as if that's supposed to give her extra credibility.

[The Magistrate]

4. This Columnist, Ma'am, Is An Ultra-Right Water-Carrier

That she disparages Sen. Clinton is no more a surprise, and of no more interest, than the sight of sunrise to the east....

[zulchzulu]

6. I think Chavez makes valid points and using the ruse that she's "right-wing" doesn't take away...

...what she surmised.

If anything, Chavez is jumping the gun. The Republicans want her as the nominee and if Chavez shows Clinton's hypocrisy this early in the campaign, it hurts their chances.

[The Magistrate]

8. It Is Not Possible For This Wretch To Make A Valid Point, Sir

Any more than it is for Mellon Scaife or David Duke to do so.

It would surprise me very much if, in Republican circles, what leftists say in assault of a leading Republican Presidential contender were quoted reverentially....

[zulchzulu]

21. Why is it that Clinton supporters could freely use Charles Krauthammer to diss Obama?

Wrongly, I might add...

From the Washingtn Post, no less. It turns out that Clinton had actually agreed with Obama on meeting World leaders before she didn't agree with him on the subject.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072601863.html

[madison]

24. Which clarification of Barack Obama's statement did Hillary "agree" with?

His chief media adviser, David Axelrod, told The Politico immediately after the debate that Obama had not promised to meet with those leaders "personally." http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=04F68840-3048-5C12-00209912ED8359F2

~ ~ ~
Obama adviser David Axelrod said on Tuesday that Obama would not just meet blindly with such leaders but only after diplomatic spadework had been accomplished. http://www.topix.net/content/cbs/2007/07/clinton-attacks-obama-after-latest-debate-4

~ ~ ~
After the debate, Obama adviser David Axelrod made the case that his candidate's pledge was not absolute and that Obama would not necessarily meet with the foreign leaders personally. http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gloves-off-in-obama-vs.-clinton-2007-07-25.html

~ ~ ~
After the debate, Obama's top political adviser, David Axelrod, tried to explain that Obama didn't really say he would meet face-to-face, one-on-one with the rogue-state leaders.

"He said that he would be willing to talk," Axelrod explained. "And what he meant was, as a government, he'd be willing and eager to initiate those kinds of talks, just as during the Cold War there were low-level discussions and mid-level discussions between us and the Soviet Union and so on. So he was not promising summits with all of those leaders." http://thehill.com/byron-york/obamas-just-not-ready-2007-07-27.html

~ ~ ~
Obama at first appeared to have found himself with little to do but deny he meant what he appeared to say. His chief media adviser, David Axelrod, told The Politico immediately after the debate that Obama had not promised to meet with those leaders "personally." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5134.html

~ ~ ~
Immediately following the debate, Obama's top advisers sought to clarify their candidate's comments. David Axelrod claimed Obama didn't mean any such meetings would actually take place. "He said that he would be willing to talk," Axelrod explained. “And what he meant was, as a government, he'd be willing and eager to initiate those kinds of talks, just as during the Cold War there were low-level discussions and mid-level discussions between us and the Soviet Union and so on. So he was not promising summits with all of those leaders." http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/07/a_clinton_counter_memo.php

~ ~ ~
"After the debate, David Axelrod, a top Obama adviser, elaborated on Mr. Obama’s statement, telling the National Review that Mr. Obama would initiate talks 'just as during the Cold War there were low-level discussions and mid-level discussions between us and the Soviet Union,' but that he was 'not promising summits' with the leaders of those rogue nations." <http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/clinton-obama-commander-duel/>

[hijinx87]

23. it's amazing how many of these RW toads

are being trotted out to bang one more dent into hillary's
armor.

I just don't understand why the RW would be attacking HRC, since
she is their stalking horse candidate. :eyes:

the ground is so thick with ridiculous conspiracy theories that it is
unsurprising that they are beginning to contradict each other.

[ruggerson]

5. Chavez is a far rightwing hack

why is this even being posted on DU?

[MonkeyFunk]

7. Because Clinton haters

will use any source they can - they have no scruples.

[Joanie Baloney]

9. If you are referring to me

I am not a Clinton hater. I posted it knowing it was from a Repub hack - I was asking what Hillary supporters think - I wanted to be able to counter this if it came up. It is here as a discussion point, nothing else.

Thanks.
JB :)

[MonkeyFunk]

12. no thanks

that just gives Chavez legitimacy. Hacks like her should be ignored.

[madison]

10. FDR: "our democracy ... is government by public opinion"

I don't get it.

When President Bush ignores public opinion on the Iraq war, Social security, stem-cell research, opposition to torture, or relief for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, Democrats criticize him for doing so.

Yet, when a Democrat has regard for public opinion, some here call it "pandering."

I happen to think FDR was one of our greatest presidents, certainly the greatest in the 20th century. Here is what he had to say about respecting public opinion.

"Governments such as ours cannot swing so far so quickly. They can only move in keeping with the thought and will of the great majority of our people. Were it otherwise the very fabric of our democracy -- which after all is government by public opinion --would be in danger of disintegration"

-- President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in 1940, to Helen Rogers Reid, wife of the publisher of the herald Tribune, an old childhood neighbor and playmate.

[Forkboy]

11. Why would you take anything this person has to say seriously?

[Joanie Baloney]

13. Hmmm...

I don't believe I said I agreed or lent creedence to the article. I think it's a bucket of shit - just asking for discussion.

Thanks,
JB

:)

[paulk]

15. you're not going to get much in the way of "discussion"

when you post something from a right winger like Chavez.

I'm just sayin'...

that maybe you should avoid posting things from Republicans that attack Democrats. It does hurt your credibility, no matter your intentions.

[Forkboy]

17. Well,you're getting that discussion.

:P

[bellasgrams]

14. Good to see the posts in support of a Dem. for a change/nt

[Forkboy]

16. Sorry,I don't suck up too often.

But I also don't use right-wing garbage to attack Dems with either,whether I like the one being attacked or not.

[MindPilot]

18. Some DUers fancy themselves capable of miracles.

No matter what an individual's intentions or motivations are for a particular post, there are always DUers who can--with uncanny Frist-like accuracy--determine the OP's TRUE motivations and intentions.

Ever think it might just be an honest question looking for a reasonable answer? Of course not; the OP must be a Hill-hating disruptor paid by Wal-Mart for the RNC who should be posting over at freeperville.

Not everyone put party before country.

[Colobo]

19. Linda Chavez is a self-hating Mexican American.

[sandnsea]

20. NAFTA was a Republican plot

So she's a liar, right out of the gate. Whatever problem I have with the Clintons, I'm not about to stoop to right wing lies to make my case against them.

[zulchzulu]

22. The Republicans did a Vulcan mind-meld on Clinton to sign NAFTA into law

Really, they did... just like they concocted "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", DOMA, the Telecommunications Act, China free trade deal...

:crazy: