Hillary Clinton enjoyed a good night last night. She won Ohio by 10% and Texas by 4%, even though the delegate differential, currently favoring Obama, didn't change much at all.
The sad part of last night is the implication, quickly to be fleshed out by the usual Knee Pad suspects, that going negative, getting down and dirty, was the reason Clinton won these two large state primaries.
Barack Obama, though virtually having a lock on delegates, having not gone negative while accumulating that lock, will now have to endure an intense sh*t storm of irrelevance, filled with gossip, half-truths and disinformation. The Clinton campaign will not be able to convince themselves of any other reason for Hillary's wins last night.
As they say, we ain't seen nothin' yet.
_________________________
From Hillary while in Toledo, Ohio the other day…..
"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he'd bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002." Source
Joe Lieberman, once the Democratic VP in 2000, now an Independent having been booted by his party in 2006, started his descent down into the neo-conservative Republican pit with comments similar to Hillary's.
The Reverend takes Hillary's words seriously, and therefore, will seek to deconstruct their wisdom.
From her comment, it's clear that Senator Clinton believes that she and John McCain have a "lifetime of experience". By stating it the way she did, it is also clear that Hillary believes the "lifetime of experience" that her and McCain have, automatically, qualifies either her or the Arizona Republican, to be president. At the same time that all that experience qualifies these two lifers to be president, Barack Obama can only make speeches. He has no experience according to Hillary, other than speechmaking. He doesn't have that "lifetime" of vast and extensive experience like she and John have.
John McCain, according to Hillary, is qualified to become president. She is qualified as well. Obama is not, he's only qualified to give speeches.
Hillary Clinton believes and states for the record that experience, like she and McCain have, qualifies them to be prepared to lead on DAY ONE. Obama, on the other hand, with only his speechmaking credentials, is not and will not be prepared to lead on DAY ONE. Unless America only wants speeches.
This veritable goldmine of experience that Hillary and McCain have accumulated, I presume, was the same goldmine of vast and extensive experience drawn upon as they both voted to send American troops into an imperialistic Bush war of choice. I also would presume that the Iraqi Intelligence Estimate wasn't read by these experienced Senators before they voted for quagmire because, after all, these two had a "lifetime" of experience from which they could draw the tremendous wisdom needed to decide such a crucial vote.
That "lifetime" of experience, found under the belts of John McCain and Hillary Clinton, but NOT Barack Obama, must have really come in handy before that crucial Iraq vote was taken. Experience like that, experience built over a "lifetime", is virtually uncanny in it's comprehension of world events. Experience like that is able to ignore the daily political noise swirling around any critical issue, like the Iraq war issue. Wisdom based only on a lifetime of experience in making tough choices is the only wisdom prepared for DAY ONE. DAY ONE won't know what hit it, when confronted with the wells of deep experience, the likes of which only John McCain and Hillary Clinton possess.
How has DAY ONE READY experience, like McCain and Clinton possess, but not Obama, paid off so far?
First of all, those lifetimes of solid, mature and broad experience resulted in giving the worst president in American history a blank check to pre-emptively attack a previously sovereign country which posed no threat to America. Without question, Obama doesn't have enough experience to make sound and righteous DAY ONE decisions like that. Only Hillary and John possess that type of experience.
This Oracle-like wisdom, only possible to accumulate over the course of a lifetime of experience inside Washington's Beltway, produced the positive results of 4000 dead American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, the distrust of the world's other countries, and Israeli-like occupations of despair. Only a lifetime of experience, the kind of experience Obama is lacking, can produce glorious, America-strengthening results like that.
The inexperienced Barack Obama, while more experienced leaders plumbed their vast wisdom en route to voting for quagmire, could only give a speech. That speech, during a time when only the experienced could discern the wisdom of bogging America down in the middle east, rightly explained why the Iraqi invasion would be disastrous on many specific levels. But alas, Obama simply couldn't draw on his "lifetime" of inside D.C. experience to be equipped enough to see the wisdom in repeating yet another Vietnam mistake. He was too much of a rookie, a speech giving rookie, to rise up and embrace such serious and well thought out empire policy positions as the Wise Warriors of Experience, Hillary and McCain, were able to do.
The Maverick and Bill Clinton's wife brought the wealth of their experience to bear on their war vote. Even though it was very popular to be for more war in 2002, war against any Muslim looking nation, that political reality had nothing to do with these two lifetime-of-experience leaders votes. The fact that Obama gave his speech, all that he could do because he had no experience, during a time when being against the potential quagmire was extremely unpopular says nothing about Obama's sound judgment or decision making abilities. It was only a speech.
The question I'm left with, now that I've been reminded of John McCain's and Hillary Clinton's uniquely qualifying attribute of "a lifetime of experience", is, can this once proud nation of ours really afford more leaders with that much experience?
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
I certianly dont think Obama has the experience to be President.
Everyone should get a copy of TIME magazine this week about what makes a good president. Obama fits the bill, what they say is experience does not necessary make a good president. I also read another article about this ,saying the same.
I am very saddened Hillary has chosen to throw mud at Obama especially knowing she pretty much can't win unless some fairy sprinkles superdelegate dust on her and they gift her the delegates from Michigan (where Obama didn't even have his name on the ballot) and Florida.
A quote from the article " In the end, determining which of the presidential candidates pays more attention to your concerns requires not adding up years of experience but a far more complex calculation: deciding what their experience have led them to truly value." One only needs to read about Obamas years in community service where he worked for under 10k a year so he could help the poor vrs Hillary always trying to get ahead for herself. Read his two books and you will see a man who really cares about the country verses a woman who is so ambitious and wants to win and who will stop at nothing to get her way.
Oh Hillary why can't you bow out graciously and be a lady …He congratulates you when you win but you do not congratulate him ….why are you becoming what the right always called you ding dong the wicked …… is ?
So, Rev, you are saying one anti-war speech in 2002 DOES qualify Obama to be president then.
If that's the case, why don't we make Cindy Sheehan the president ? Or maybe Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, or the guy who works at the convenience down the street from my house. By your logic, they would all be better qualified for the job than Hillary or McCain. Yes, that's very sensible.
And King, it's also true.
The issue is not experience, it's judgment, Hillary has no real executive leadership experience to speak of. Obama atually has more legislative years than Hillary.
When wisdom was needed in the Iraq vote, Hillary had none.
There is no credible way of saying that Obama's speech against the stupidity of Iraq wasn't an example of strong leadership. Courageous actually. Iraq was a life and death issue, not some trade agreement. 70% of the clueless country was all in to bomb Iraq. Obama spoke truth to the majority during the runup. And he was note for note accurate about what would happen if we attacked Iraq.
That's leadership. That's what leadership looks like. This issue wasn't some argument over earmarks. It was whether 4000 soldiers would be dead. It was whether $3 trillion in debt, with nothing to show for it, was sound fiscal judgment.
Andrea: The one thing about Hillary, and I'm being serious here, Hillary is a fighter. I think that quality will, in the end, wind up damaging the party. It is possible, not likely but possible, that Hillary's pugnacity could lead to a McCain presidency. That would be very bad. Very bad.
Hillary has turned into a self serving monster. I voted for her to be my senator , I liked her and I am so disappointed in her now. What is sad is I know her types very well , I have an ambitious sister in my family who cant lose. So she will take all around her down.
Well Rev, I was also against the Iraq invasion, and since that is the only thing that matters to you, I'm happy to accept your endorsement for president. I'm running as a Democrat, and I'm giving away all kinds of free stuff to the people, much more than Obama, so I expect your support. How large will your donation to my campaign be ?
I'm a bit tapped out right now…..you know, I had to stimulate the economy recently…..but check back in the fall.
I know you think it's about the free stuff. We just have a fundamental disagreement about this. I think that if there is a category of people out there who are just in it for the free stuff, it isn't that big of a category. Most people have strong senses of individuality. Yes, there are the dependent types. I don't disagree, but I don't think the numbers justify the stereotyping.
Iraq is huge. America would be better off this election season if we engaged in political discussions about Iraq. With Obama/McCain America has clear chices. With Hillary/McCain, not so much.