The Low Road to Victory
The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.
Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.
If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.
On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11. A Clinton television ad — torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook — evoked the 1929 stock market crash, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis, the cold war and the 9/11 attacks, complete with video of Osama bin Laden. “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” the narrator intoned.
If that was supposed to bolster Mrs. Clinton’s argument that she is the better prepared to be president in a dangerous world, she sent the opposite message on Tuesday morning by declaring in an interview on ABC News that if Iran attacked Israel while she were president: “We would be able to totally obliterate them.”
Does anyone think this is a legitimate response?
If bullys tear down your fort does that give you the right to 'obliterate' theirs?
I realize Israel is an ally and should be supported to some extent unless they prove themselves to be more trouble than they are worth, which is anytime now unless they patch up their relationship with their Arab neighbors.
The point is Iran is NOT nuking Israel and will not be nuking them until they build and test a thermo-nuclear device which has not happened and probably will not happen if diplomacy works at all.
So why the tough rhetoric from HRC? Likely eager to shed the 'vulnerable' image and sound like a tough broad? or Eager to fatten the coffers of the Military Industrial Complex like the insane clowns are doing now, continuing the process.
Is it necessary to become a bully to defeat a bully? What are the consequences of the 'bully' mentality picked up by someone who is not one to begin with?
What are the consequences of being the worlds bully, threatening offenders with nuclear annihilation?
Being alone in a world wrapped in fear of your very being thats what.
Peace becomes an quaint concept, people die.