This "analysis" from AP highlights the issue of Hillary Clinton's extensive experience.
Experience? What experience?
I think it's a joke for Hillary to be posturing as the great experienced one.
I agree with her that Obama is incredibly naive, dangerously naive when it comes to foreign policy.
But she's not an experienced ELECTED official. She only has one more term in the Senate than Obama, hardly a tremendous difference. She has nothing when it comes to executive experience. (Does Bill really want to acknowledge that he was off having fun while Hillary was the brains behind his time as governor and president?)
For Hillary to paint herself as the one with all the experience, she has to run as Bill's doppelganger.
For Hillary to be seen as experienced she has to say, "I am Bill."
Does this supposedly strong, super-intelligent woman want to stand on her own accomplishments or those of her husband?
Hillary wasn't elected the governor of Arkansas. She wasn't elected president for two terms.
Apparently, she thinks she was.
Perhaps the nation should have enlisted Mamie Eisenhower as a general during the Vietnam War.
Experience? What experience?
Analysis: Who's the Dems Goldilocks?
(Note: AP needs some better editors. "Dems' " is correct. Those infallible professional journalists...)
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is too experienced, Sen. Barack Obama too raw. Listening to Democrats give their Goldilocks view of the 2008 presidential campaign must make voters wonder: Will any candidate be just right for the White House?
"Senator Obama does represent change. Senator Clinton has experience. Change and experience," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday, making a balancing gesture with his hands. "With me, you get both."
Richardson may be a long shot for the nomination, but his crack underscored a question that dominated the latest presidential debate: A change versus experience dynamic that almost surely will determine who represents the Democratic Party next year.
Obama, a first-term senator only three years out of the Illinois Legislature, casts himself as a change agent who would overcome the nation's broken political system. He hopes to make Clinton's three decades in politics a detriment.
Clinton, a former first lady who entered the Senate as her husband left the White House, says she is the lone candidate with enough experience to enact change.
I think it's a joke for Hillary to be posturing as the great experienced one.
I agree with her that Obama is incredibly naive, dangerously naive when it comes to foreign policy.
But she's not an experienced ELECTED official. She only has one more term in the Senate than Obama, hardly a tremendous difference. She has nothing when it comes to executive experience. (Does Bill really want to acknowledge that he was off having fun while Hillary was the brains behind his time as governor and president?)
For Hillary to paint herself as the one with all the experience, she has to run as Bill's doppelganger.
For Hillary to be seen as experienced she has to say, "I am Bill."
Does this supposedly strong, super-intelligent woman want to stand on her own accomplishments or those of her husband?
Hillary wasn't elected the governor of Arkansas. She wasn't elected president for two terms.
Apparently, she thinks she was.
Perhaps the nation should have enlisted Mamie Eisenhower as a general during the Vietnam War.
4 comments:
"Does this supposedly strong, super-intelligent woman want to stand on her own accomplishments or those of her husband?"
Actually, I think the point is that Bill's accomplishments are in part due to Hillary. This I do not doubt, her influence even in his campaign in Arkansas is well documented. Any first lady who takes an interest is in a unique position of observing the Presidency, travelling to foreign countries and meeting world leaders (two terms of it in this case). Bill claims that Hillary is his greatest advisor, no doubt they discussed every obstacle he faced in great detail together.
The tradition/stereotype might have been that first ladies wear nice dresses and decorate but that hasn't been true of many first ladies (think Eleanor Roosevelt.
A lot of women might resent the argument that they ride on their husband's coat tails, where they put their own careers on hold for their spouse/kids etc in order to ensure the other's success.
In short. There's nothing wrong with saying that being first lady is part of her experience.
I agree. There's nothing wrong with Hillary including her time as first lady on her resume.
I don't think she can rightfully claim it as on par with holding office.
here's a worthwhile link...
http://bartblog.bartcop.com/2007/08/27/the-resume-of-hillary-clinton/
Post a Comment