Hillary a good choice for 08'? I think this article shows why she's not..

[Dawgs]

Sen. Clinton apologizes to Chelsea for work comment

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/15/clinton.apologize.ap/index.html

'After telling an audience that young people today "think work is a four-letter word," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she apologized to her daughter.'

If a story like this gets national coverage now, how do you think it will played in 2008?

Don't get me wrong, I really like Hillary. I just don't think we can afford to try to get her elected in this day and time.

[doc03]

1. To start I am not a Hillary fan but what do you disagree

with that young people won't work or that she apologized for the remark?

[Dawgs]

3. Where did I say I disagreed with the article?

Maybe you're missing my point. It's not about the content of the article, it's the fact that it's a front page article. If she gets nominated you will see an article like this daily. It may not be as hurtful, but it will be damaging.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Work

is a four letter word. Even ****, with his limited intelligence could figure that.

[boobooday]

4. She's not a good candidate

NO more political dynasties. No more Clintons, no more Bushes. No more Skull and Bones, either.

New blood. New ideas.

[HornBuckler]

8. Couldn't agree with you more.

Amen.

[Marr]

11. I agree.

[papau]

5. Article is on address to students explaining "entitlement "in prior speech

I do not see how this hurts her - most students would agree with her.

[Rose Siding]

6. She said it to the Chamber of Commerce, but this apology is good

Have you seen the whole speech? Do you have a copy? I was looking for it last night.

[papau]

14. I also was looking for either speech - and found neither - but she does

post them to her web site.

At the moment her web site is very busy - takes forever to download, plus I do not expect last weeks speeches to be up until late this week.

I do want to read them both.

Curious that only right wing nuts like Fox/NY Post/ and Human Events are even mentioning the first speech - and then they are only using editorial comments by "listeners".

[Ravenseye]

7. I agree with you

They're so used to attacking Hilary that will be all they do. Plus use wedge issues to get her to say things that, while aren't bad, they can attack her with. Heck, she could say "We need to balance the budget." or "We need a strong national security." and they'd use it against her at this point just by twisting her words and lying. Sure they'll do this to every candidate, but there is already some validity in many people's heads, even democrats, of these sorts of critisms.

[Lerkfish]

9. This is the point I"ve been making: irregardless of her qualifications,

she's a lightning rod to the right wing for hatred and loathing.
Is that fair? no way. but would the party have to fend that off every frickin day, you betcha. And it would take its toll and bog down the campaign.
I think this is exactly why the republicans keep trying to cast her as the candidate, they know their base hates her irrationally, so they'd much rather run against someone they can relentlessly target.

I for one don't want to lose (or get diebolded) the presidency to the party of corruption again. I would prefer Gore, Conyers, Boxer, Kerry, etc. long before Clinton.

again, I have not much problem with her personally (though her recent votes and statements irritate me), but I think it would be like when the republicans ran Dole...there was no way he was going to win, because not enough people liked him, period. It was an expensive, pointless excercise, and one they learned from: When they packaged Dimson, they hammered the "guy you'd like to drink a beer with" and "clearing brush off the ranch like a real amurikan cowboy" until the backwash spoke and thought it automatically.
The backwash ALREADY HAS BEEN INDELIBLY PROGRAMMED to hate Ms. Clinton. The amount of relentless swiftboating she'd be in for is not only sisyphean to counter, but I don't think it would be fair to her, either.

I think she should run, but NOT in '08.

[CoffeeCat]

10. Hillary is the corporate media's candidate....

...she's not the candidate of the Democratic party.

I'm so tired of them propping her up. All of that special treatment, only demonstrates to me, that Hillary is a corporatist--and not interested in progressive issues. She's business as usual.

Frankly, I haven't met one progressive or liberal who is remotely interested or excited about her as a candidate.

Most cringe.

[Marr]

12. Yep- I don't get this.

She's a long shot candidate no matter what the political atmosphere is like. She'll bring Republicans out to the polls in force- even the ones that have been disillusioned by the current GOP.

And on top of that, she's a moderate *at best*.

Why risk everything for a chance to gain nothing? I don't get it.

[CoffeeCat]

13. You have to wonder....

about her lack of voice on so many important issues of today.

For God's sakes...BushCo is destroying the Constitution and running a lie-based war that
is corrupting the country. They're spying on us illegally and infringing on our rights.

Where's Hillary?

Anyone who isn't screaming from the rafters about the corruption and failed policies--doesn't deserve to be the Dem candidate.

You also have to question her coziness with the Bush clan. Either you abhor Fascism and the PNAC scum who are brining down this country and screwing its citizens--or you don't.

Socializing with these scumbags makes me wonder about what's going on at the top. Do we have one sect in power--made up of Dems and Reps who volley power back and forth?

Sorry...too many reasons not to support her candidacy. She's too silent on too much when too many are suffering. Period.