Which part of Hillary's terror statement was misinterpreted?

[ProSense]

"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world," Clinton told supporters in Concord.

"So I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that," she added.

link

Fear Itself

Hillary Clinton Buys Into GOP Propaganda

[jgraz]

1. Well, there was that part right afterwards where she said "Just Kidding!"

Hey, a guy can dream...

[Alamom]

2. 8 threads on the first page...

[Double T]

4. Quit using the michael vick animal abuse 'smileys'.............

and leave THAT dead horse alone!! There's ENOUGH violence around HERE lately!!

[lvx35]

3. I don't see what's wrong with her statement.

I just heard it, but I have no idea what the bruhahah is all about. Its true, and it points out the CRITICAL problem which is that terrorism helps the Republicans. Everybody from the 9/11 crowd at least ought to be grateful. Its acknowledgeing that the sick system which props up war profiteers and defense contractors is always made stronger by the very people they claim to be fighting.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. She's correct. It's the unspoken ( 'til today) rationale...

... of her candidacy. And really the only reason for any DEM primary voter to give her a second thought.

But it's not enough.

[ProSense]

6. She's not correct.

It's absurd!

Bush and the Repubs claim he has made us safer (supported by her previous statement), but if we're attacked the Repubs will have an edge.

In fact, it's beyond absurd.


edited typo.

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. It may be 'absurd' and it is certainly illogical, but...

... that's the way ( if history is any guide; and it is.) this dynamic ( the 'Reichstag Fire' phenomenom) works.

The reaction will be 'destroy the evildoers' ( i.e. whomever our rulers designate as culprits), and 'blame the pacifists'.

In a time of nat'l crisis ( that involves a real, imagined, or invented foreign enemy), the reaction of most is to rally 'round the flag'.

Clinton is clever to underscore this inconvenient truth, as her bellicose pronouncements and general shortsightedness in the area of foreign policy will serve to inoculate her somewhat from the post-Reichstag wave of know-nothingism that will sweep reason and logic away.

I didn't say I liked it; I'm saying that's the way it is.

I'm still not supporting her.

[ProSense]

12. It's not an inconvenient truth, she is parroting a RW meme

This is not Sept 11. She is pushing a meme that was inaccurate to begin with, now, six years after the attacks, failed policies and GOP stonewalling. The 2006 election successes behind her and she is still helping to support a false perception that in all reality is now bogus, except among wingnuts. I guess next she'll be saying if we leave Iraq, Republicans will have an edge if the violence escalates. BS!

[alfredo]

15. She is right in that the Reps will say they were right in that they would

follow us home, or that the Dems emboldened the terrorist to the point of deciding to strike when they did. You know the junta will blame any attack on the Dems and other critics of his Lebensraum.

[ProSense]

19. She is wrong! She didn't say the Repubs would blame the Dems,

She said an attack "will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again"

Really absurd, ridiculous, stupid comment!

[alfredo]

20. I think she is laying the groundwork to blame them for

politicizing an attack for political gain.

Let's put it in people's minds that the republicans want an attack because that is the only way they could hope to hold onto power. We do have it on record prominent republicans calling for attacks on Americans. Some even told them where they should attack. San Francisco seems to be their favorite target.

[ProSense]

22. By what?

Politicizing a terror attack for political gain?

Beyond absurd.

Again, her comment was that an attack "will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again..."

She is not setting them up for anything, she is echoing their faulty logic!

[alfredo]

23. I think anything that comes out of her mouth you will try

to find fault.

I'm not in Hillary's camp but the more you guys pile on her, the more I want to defend her. You guys are starting to sound like the women haters Hannity Savage and Rush.


Republicans want an attack because it is good for them politically that's the frame. She is framing the issue.

[ProSense]

24. She is not framing, she is saying something stupid!

But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it...

Stupid, not a frame!

[alfredo]

25. time will tell. My state primary is well past the time a winner will be

known. I don't have a dog in the primary fight.

I will support whoever wins the Dem nomination. I will work just as hard for Gravel as I would for Obama or Richardson.

I think that quote proves my point.

[yardwork]

18. Of course it's absurd. That's why she's getting it out there.

This is EXACTLY what the Republicans will do if there is another "terrorist" attack between now and the election. In fact, they are capable of manufacturing one.

By stating this up front, Clinton defangs it. She might even force them to give up the idea altogether.

She's not stupid. The Clintons are a lot of things, but they are neither stupid nor cowardly. They know exactly what they're up against, and they're willing to fight back.

[rufus dog]

7. an asinine statement

So her way of taking some of the R vote is that she is the best Dem to manage catastrophes caused buy self induced bad management?

[usregimechange]

9. None of the parts.

[Capn Sunshine]

10. I don't understand the philosophy that every terror attack gives the republicans an advantage.

It would seem logical to me, and the rest of the American public, that BushCo let us down. Dropped the ball. Screwed up. Katrina redux.

Why would this be "advantage Republicans?"

[PurityOfEssence]

11. It's pompous, it reeks of victimhood, and her conclusion has no logic to it at all

Let's take these three slurs separately.

If this is an accurate quote, it sounds like she's TELLING us what will happen, when that will happen is anything but as obvious. If a terrorist event happens in an industrial site that the Bush Administration has overlooked and ignored opposition critiques of, it could backfire on them completely. If they try to do a Giuliani with it and wave the bloody shirt, that could also backfire on them. The circumstances of the event are hardly of only one sort, and to presume that any particular strike would work to their advantage is absurd.

She plays to victimhood here, which is something reactionaries LOVE to hear. I can almost hear cricket-like chorusing of "whiner, whiner" as I read of this fatuous little pronouncement. Poor, poor us, those big mean wepubwicans; it's not fair. Showing how they use fear to control the rest of us is one thing, but politics is for grown-ups, and swing as the pendulum may or may not, there's more than just a hint of self-pity here.

The conclusion makes no sense; certainly not within the context of the printed version. An attack would benefit them, therefore I'm the best person to bet on. Why? For what conceivable reason? Is she intimating that she's the stalwart, no-nonsense crusader who's consistently stood up to the monarchists? It just ain't so. She's caved and accommodated on so many things that the words "maneuvering" and "positioning" literally echo as she strides by. She's withstood her personal assaults by careful dancing and evasive, non-committal acrobatics, but she hasn't stood up to them and given them hell. All that proves is she's good at taking care of herself.

Maybe that's not what she means, but the connection between the body of the statement and the conclusion that she's best MAKES NO CLAIM OF A TRAIT THAT WOULD MAKE HER SO SUPERIOR. How are we to fill in the blank? Is it just the cult of the personality? I'm me, so I'm the only one who can save you? I'm guessing that she's intimating that she's the real brawler and steadfast vox populi, but that's a joke; she's been anything but. Her whole performance as a Senator has been based on our faith that she'll "do the right thing" when she finally has the chance. When is this chance going to present itself?

[paulk]

16. well, you could "fill in the blank" by Hillary saying

"Don't vote for me, I'm the worst possible candidate for the job. Vote for someone else! Vote for a Republican! Don't vote at all!"

Would that work for you?

Would that be "logical"?

[unkachuck]

13. maybe....

"...if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again..."

....only if the Dems continue to play defense and let the repugs frame the debate....

"So I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that"

....just like you've fought bushco for the last six years?

[Capn Sunshine]

14. well, its the primaries, so logic goes out the window

followed closely by Democratic core beliefs. Winning trumps all that.

[janx]

17. I have a question. I've only seen this statement out of context.

Was this in response to a question, or did she just come out with this with no prompt whatsoever?

Out of context statements are the pride of reporters during primary season, so I always like to consider the source and the context.

[JTFrog]

21. Seems she brought the hypothetical up all by herself.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08242007/news/nationalnews/hill__terror_would_be_gop_boos.htm

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday raised the prospect of a terror attack before next year's election, warning that it could boost the GOP's efforts to hold on to the White House.

Discussing the possibility of a new nightmare assault while campaigning in New Hampshire, Clinton also insisted she is the Democratic candidate best equipped to deal with it.

"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world," Clinton told supporters in Concord.

"So I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that," she added.

The former first lady made the surprising comments as she explained to supporters that she has beaten back the GOP's negative attacks for years, and is ready to do so again.