Hillary: If only the economy would tank!

posted at 10:43 pm on February 27, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Hillary Clinton today tied her fortunes to the rest of us losing ours. Speaking at an Ohio rally, the presidential contender told the faithful that economic issues would be the primary factor in the 2008 elections. That is, as long as it made people miserable:

Hillary Rodham Clinton spent almost three hours Wednesday trying to persuade a college gym full of Ohioans that her detailed plans to revive the failing economy can also resuscitate her dwindling campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“Obviously, the economy is the No. 1 issue in the country, and it’s unbelievably important here in Ohio,” said Clinton. “I think, absent any intervening circumstances, the economy will be the domestic driver with all the related issues like health care and energy costs and home foreclosures.”

Absent any intervening circumstances? Like what — prosperity, employment, and security? It sounds like Hillary has her own version of hope and change in the presidential race. Specifically, her only hope is that the economy changes for the worse.

Most of us hope that we can avoid a downturn in the economy. That’s why so many of us want Congress to act to keep the tax rates from increasing in 2010 by making the Bush tax cuts permanent. We want Congress to start reducing federal spending and start working on entitlement reforms before the inevitable meltdown. Unfortunately, both Democratic candidates have proposed hundreds of billions in new spending and tax increases.

Maybe Hillary should take a hint from her own language here. The biggest worry about the economy comes literally from intervening – the kind of intervening done by politicians trying to enforce equal outcomes rather than provide equal opportunities. At the very least, we’d hope that she would be rooting for our success, rather than hoping to get lucky and ride a recession to power.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I think, absent any intervening circumstances, the economy will be the domestic driver

Unless something other than the economy becomes the driving domestic issue, but I don’t know what it would be. Illegal Immigration?

waterhouse on February 27, 2008 at 10:53 PM

The Clintons do not give a fat rats rump about anything less than living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue again.

It is all about Them, Period. Same old high mileage used car with a new paint job.

No thanks! Let them find a new scam and take Osama Obama with them!

old trooper on February 27, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Ya know, this kinda reminds me of

“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.

ChenZhen on February 27, 2008 at 10:54 PM

I’m so glad that she pointed out that in Ohio the economy is really important. I didn’t realize there were certain states in which the economy was not important. I wish I could get a list so I could avoid moving to those places.

On a more positive note, she’ll be gone soon.

Mormon Doc on February 27, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Let the Clinton,s wish on! This is America. We still have a republican Prez..That really does care!

beachkatie on February 27, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Its funny to watch the Hildebeest’s campaign implode. I’m really even doubting she’ll win the PA primary.

doubleplusundead on February 27, 2008 at 10:58 PM

“You feel alone and the bottom drops out of your whole life,” said Landry. “The bottom line is you don’t know what to do and you’re lost.”

That underscored a core message of her campaign.

Mourning in America

Deety on February 27, 2008 at 11:00 PM

Hillary Clinton today tied her fortunes to the rest of us losing ours.

It’s this level of insight and articulation and that makes me a fan. Right you are, Capt. Ed.

petefrt on February 27, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Silky will deliver the coup de grace before the weekend. Then he’ll run off to count his silver.

Limerick on February 27, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Captain I dont want to play anymore, please come back! This community has a high wingnut quotient.

Squid Shark on February 27, 2008 at 11:22 PM

So Hillary,Barack,spouses,children,second cousins twice removed and other denizens of the dark come bearing gifts of salvation for the tortured region I live in and the populace sucks it up like it’s the elixer of life.One would think that the stranglehold of the dems on this region for the better part of 50 years would open some eyes…but it’s so much easier to blame the booosh administration.

raceroh on February 27, 2008 at 11:23 PM

I hate to burst her bubble but the economy (jobs) in Northeast Ohio has been going downhill for years. That’s why I left there in ’84. And it hasn’t gotten any better it’s only gotten worse. The area around my hometown looks like a ghosttown. And what did Bill and Hillary do for Northeast Ohio or the entire state in the ’90′s? Not much as far as I can tell.

atxcowgirl on February 27, 2008 at 11:24 PM

…trying to enforce equal outcomes rather than provide equal opportunities.
Hillary Clinton today tied her fortunes to the rest of us losing ours.

Right said Ed. I think these should be the quote of the day. You certainly have a way with words, man. I’m glad you’re here.

shibumiglass on February 27, 2008 at 11:29 PM

Am I wrong in asking that since Mrs. Mao Pant Suit is being paid to be a United States Senator, that along with shilling to the masses, she should have her butt in the Senate introducing legislation to try to fix the problems she is complaining about?

Or is that just too much to ask these days?

Seven Percent Solution on February 27, 2008 at 11:32 PM

she should have her butt in the Senate introducing legislation…

Seven Percent Solution on February 27, 2008 at 11:32 PM

Uhm, given her expressed ideas on how these problems should be fixed, I’m quite happy to see her otherwise occupied.

You go girl!

Never give up!

Fight ‘em all the way to Denver!

Deety on February 27, 2008 at 11:41 PM

It worked for her husband.

And he did fix the problems…

alphie on February 27, 2008 at 11:48 PM

Has anyone noticed that, after over $300,000,000 in US stimulous and more in foreign market injections into the conomy, the markets have seen a couple of weeks of modest gain BUT, is this real and have we bottomed out?

I don’t think we have nearly reached the bottom:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJ0QCPCgQIpA&refer=home

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avXv.p052y6w&refer=home

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a5YMZHxaPcFU&refer=home

The last is the scariest…inflation is up and the fed wants to print more money again.

I worry that the bottom will fall out any week now. If it does the drop in the markets could be as much as 20% and fast. Home mortgage failures are still rising as is inflation. Gas could hit $4 this summer, gold is over $950 and seems to be rising again.

Note I have not mentioned the quick repercussions of a democrat win in November. Socialism could drive us into a years long recession.

The woman could well be right about her only chance.

JIMV on February 27, 2008 at 11:48 PM

I have commented for years that the Democrat party is unique in that their success is predicated upon the failure of America in general and the individual voters in particular, thereby being the largest institution in this nation with a vested interest in American failures at every level of economics, society and politics.

deepdiver on February 27, 2008 at 11:49 PM

Please make that $300 Billion…I left out a few digits…late

JIMV on February 27, 2008 at 11:50 PM

the economy will be the domestic driver

But Hillary, if you give licenses to illegal immigrants, they can be domestic drivers!

jgapinoy on February 27, 2008 at 11:53 PM

This community has a high wingnut quotient.

“Community”? What’s that supposed to mean? Yer not some kinda it-takes-a-village commie are you?

I smell a Red.

Boys…Get the rope.

29Victor on February 27, 2008 at 11:54 PM

Deety on February 27, 2008 at 11:41 PM

Thanks Deety, my hidden agenda was to have Mrs. Moe written her ideas down, and presented them for all to see…. kinda like when I was interviewed for my last couple of jobs.

Kinda went like this……

The sentence that came up mostly after “what race are you”, and “where do you see yourself in five years?” was…

“So, can you do the job, and specifically how, and why should I hire you?”

Seven Percent Solution on February 27, 2008 at 11:56 PM

The biggest worry about the economy comes literally from intervening – the kind of intervening done by politicians trying to enforce equal outcomes rather than provide equal opportunities.

Preach it. I don’t need economic stimulus. I need the government to stop de-stimulating our currency with out-out-control inflation. I need the government to refrain from stimulating 40 or 50 percent of my income out of my pocket and into theirs. I need the government to spend money on stimulating the defense of this country (how about them borders!), not that of 100+ other countries.

Or in other words… I’ve got your stimulus right here. Hm… doesn’t work as well in this format.

Mark Jaquith on February 28, 2008 at 12:00 AM

Okay, so I totally have your new subhead for this article:

“It takes a recession to raise a candidate.”

Mark Jaquith on February 28, 2008 at 12:03 AM

Hillary’s dream tonight…….

Seven Percent Solution on February 28, 2008 at 12:06 AM

deepdiver

I hear Rush say that exact same thing fairly regularly. Do you listen to him?

Mormon Doc on February 28, 2008 at 12:09 AM

Unless something other than the economy becomes the driving domestic issue, but I don’t know what it would be. Illegal Immigration?

waterhouse on February 27, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Nope. Voters whose first priority is illegal immigration are easily the noisiest bunch, but even in the Republican primaries, immigration was pretty far down the list of issues if you believe exit polls. “The Economy” is almost always at or near the top of the list, because voters a.) do not understand it very well and b.) use it as a proxy issue for all sorts of other things, rating it as poor whenever they are unhappy about circumstances. Also, economics is at the core of the political divide in most modern societies, so either the third (or so) of voters who are free market true believers or the third (or so) who are pretty much socialists will find fault with its structure, even if there is a great degree of prosperity all around. This last point means that there is a low ceiling to how highly voters rate economic perfrmance at any given time.

Big S on February 28, 2008 at 12:26 AM

Anything that has the Bush legacy touching it, the economy, tax cuts and the war are Hillary’s talking points. Her solutions are more government, but someone has to pay for all that government. Hence, if it can be blamed on Bush, it deflects from her own policies which inherently will be bad for the economy. Just her universal health care plan would be enough to tank the economy.

Kini on February 28, 2008 at 12:37 AM

The statist Democrats do want the economy to tank so they can usher more people into the arms of the government.

I remember hearing Terry McAuliffe several years ago admitting that a bad economy is good for their party and you could tell he and his ilk were hoping for it. It illustrated to me exactly why choosing their side is wrong for America. They want our economy to go south, they want us to lose the war, and they want everyone to be miserable so they can elevate themselves to power. There’s something severely wrong with that.

CP on February 28, 2008 at 12:50 AM

Hillary/Obama: The economy stinks! And if you elect me, I will have the government totally take it over and fix it…in a while…just like Homeland Security…and the IRS!

Voter (checking his 401k statement) pulls the lever for McCain

PattyJ on February 28, 2008 at 1:09 AM

CIA Rank Order – GDP – real growth rate:

World 5.20%

176 Nepal 2.50%
177 Togo 2.50%
178 Aruba 2.40%
179 Tonga 2.40%
180 Faroe Islands 2.40%
181 United States 2.20%

Not sure how much worse the economy could get under Hillary or Obama.

alphie on February 28, 2008 at 1:48 AM

The US economy will avoid recession as the housing market begins to recover this spring, according to billionaire investor Sam Zell. Speaking on “Squawk Box” this morning, Zell attributed much of the current economic troubles to fear-mongering and politicking by Democratic presidential contenders Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama. “Obviously what we have going on is an attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy … We have two Democratic candidates who are vying with each other to describe the economic situation worse.

The ecomony was down at the end of Klinton 2, the media blames it on Bush before he even takes office, then the economy has been great since the tax cuts, but the media doesn’t mention it, then there’s a slight downturn and they got NUTS about it. If the it goes back up again, the media will ignore it again. With no bad economic news and the war in Iraq pretty much over, what will the dems grip about? Oh yeah, health care! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Tony737 on February 28, 2008 at 2:01 AM

Why doesn’t the Right, the WH, etc just pound the left every day about dem cities like Detroit?

“Obama will do for America what the dems have done for Detroit!”

How hard is that?

Tony737 on February 28, 2008 at 2:07 AM

What an intellect.

Strong, tough, smart.

benrand on February 28, 2008 at 2:37 AM

CIA Rank Order – GDP – real growth rate:

World 5.20%

176 Nepal 2.50%
177 Togo 2.50%
178 Aruba 2.40%
179 Tonga 2.40%
180 Faroe Islands 2.40%
181 United States 2.20%

What is 2.2% of 13 Trillion dollars?

Not sure how much worse the economy could get under Hillary or Obama.

If Democrats hadn’t pushed lenders to be more “fair and equitable” to poor folks so they could buy a house, we would still be in a bull market. Considering all that has happend since 2000, the economy is just fine. The standard of living in the United States is nuts, just look around you (unless you live in an area run by liberals, those are usually crime ridden, drug infested and loaded with taxes).

spec_ops_mateo on February 28, 2008 at 2:57 AM

European Union -
GDP (official exchange rate): $14.51 trillion
GDP – real growth rate: 3.0%

What is 3.0% of $14.51 trillion, spec?

alphie on February 28, 2008 at 3:10 AM

Fairly good, considering the size and clout of the EU. Then again, they don’t spend as much on Military – more so on domestic stuff like “free” health care.

If 2.2% is bad, I’d love to see good in such a developed economy as ours.

And of course, we know that presidents run the economy, and Hillary or Obama plus democrat-made laws will make jobs fall from the sky and the “working poor” everywhere will be able to afford a 2nd set of silver spinners for their Cadillacs.

spec_ops_mateo on February 28, 2008 at 3:15 AM

European Union -
GDP (official exchange rate): $14.51 trillion
GDP – real growth rate: 3.0%

What is 3.0% of $14.51 trillion, spec?

alphie on February 28, 2008 at 3:10 AM

Is that a country now?
Good then they only get 1 vote at the UN.

Chakra Hammer on February 28, 2008 at 4:29 AM

The European Union is composed of 27 independent sovereign countries which are known as member states: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

Only 1 vote at the UN.

Chakra Hammer on February 28, 2008 at 4:31 AM

If they get 27 votes the USA should get 50 votes

Chakra Hammer on February 28, 2008 at 4:32 AM

Raising taxes isn’t going to spur growth!

Chakra Hammer on February 28, 2008 at 4:36 AM

Why has Europe thrown out most of the liberals? EVEN FRANCE DID!

Chakra Hammer on February 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM

Good catch, Ed. Funny pic and cap, too.

silverfox on February 28, 2008 at 4:49 AM

Eevery time I listen to Hillary, she sounds like she’s going to be a 1 woman government. “I’m going to do this…I’m going to do that”. She is so power-obsessed that she figures she’ll just run the whole show from the chair in the Oval Office.

Graysonret on February 28, 2008 at 5:02 AM

Eevery time I listen to Hillary, she sounds like she’s going to be a 1 woman government. “I’m going to do this…I’m going to do that”. She is so power-obsessed that she figures she’ll just run the whole show from the chair in the Oval Office.

Graysonret on February 28, 2008 at 5:02 AM

This from the woman that said the American Public could not aford her if she were president.

tengger on February 28, 2008 at 6:08 AM

…politicians trying to enforce equal outcomes rather than provide equal opportunities…

That is the key. Leave the outcome to us, just provide equal opportunity. That is all the gov’t should do.

As for the EU, their impending dhimmitude will bury them.

Zorro on February 28, 2008 at 6:56 AM

Sounds like an Obama quote….well it would if he would say anything.

percysunshine on February 28, 2008 at 7:25 AM

Just of thought of being cooped up in a high school gym with Shillary for three straight hours gives me the chills!

pilamaye on February 28, 2008 at 7:26 AM

My inside sources tell me that she will withdraw by this weekend.

“Better to go out sooner and look classy- like Mitt than hang around and look like a dunce- like Huckabee.”

Alden Pyle on February 28, 2008 at 7:46 AM

My financial advisor insists that the non-financial sectors of the market are fine, that they will recover by summer, that the Fed rate cuts will kick in by then as well, and we’ll be churning along just dandy in a few months. My brother, on the other hand, has converted his investments to cash and is hunkering down. So who knows?

In point of fact, since the Bush tax cuts took effect, we have had the best economy in history for about six years: full employment, low interest rates, high productivity, sustainable growth. Even the recent slide in the value of the dollar relative to the Euro has had the benefit of improving sales abroad (and probably tourism here in the USA). But perhaps we were about ‘due’ for a setback; there is such a thing as the business cycle, after all.

The question is, can Bernanke and company keep the wolf from the door long enough to keep the Democrats from following him in?

Presidents don’t really have much to do with ‘the economy’ (as if that were some kind of monolithic entity), except for tax policy. But the media and the general public maintain the myth that they do. It’s the old “If the crops are bad, kill the king” mentality; the king was thought to have a magical influence on prosperity. The Democrats will benefit if we go into recession, and they and their allies in the MSM will do everything to insure that we do.

MrLynn on February 28, 2008 at 7:47 AM

The Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy,

… according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

J_Gocht on February 28, 2008 at 7:49 AM

PS I’m new here, following Captain Ed. Is it possible to edit our comments? And can Hot Air notify us when there are replies?

MrLynn on February 28, 2008 at 7:51 AM

Writes J_Gocht:

The Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy,

… according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

Huh? Sub-prime lending was for real-estate buyers. What has that to do with the war (and subsequent pacification) in Iraq?

MrLynn on February 28, 2008 at 7:54 AM

Absent any intervening circumstances? Like what — prosperity, employment, and security? It sounds like Hillary has her own version of hope and change in the presidential race. Specifically, her only hope is that the economy changes for the worse.

Cap’n Ed, you are only stating the obvious- this has been the mantra of the left/Dems since 2001 as soon as Bush took office.

jimbo2008 on February 28, 2008 at 8:10 AM

The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit.
“The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system,” he said.
That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history… Stiglitz said.


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/theworld/

J_Gocht on February 28, 2008 at 8:11 AM

Squid Shark said: “Captain I dont want to play anymore, please come back! This community has a high wingnut quotient.”

He’s not likely coming back. At least not for awhile. In the meantime, I wish someone would set up a blog that simply linked to Cap’n Ed’s writings with the Disqus system for comments. At least then, the intellectual community that was following him would have somewhere to gather again.

Love ya Cap’n!

galynn on February 28, 2008 at 8:13 AM

Here’s the URL to Stiglitz…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23286149-2703,00.html

J_Gocht on February 28, 2008 at 8:22 AM

I threw it out on another forum early last summer—-I see Al Queda getting desperate enough to team up with Global Warmers/Enviro wackos to “create” a situation, and now I’ll throw G.Soro’s/Hillary into the mix also….

Soros has stated he wants USA Prominance reduced, and the best way “for a regime change in the USA” is via an economic crisis……see a recent AMthinker article on it

sbark on February 28, 2008 at 8:33 AM

just saying hi, and registering Ed.
Good luck in the new place..

sashal on February 28, 2008 at 9:06 AM

the economy will be the domestic driver with all the related issues like health care and energy costs and home foreclosures.

Blinding flash of the obvious from the “world’s smartest woman”. What else drives domestic issues like health care and home foreclosures? I do take exception with her claim that energy costs are tied to the economy when she and her party have repeatedly thwarted any attempt to exploit American natural resources for greater energy independence.

highhopes on February 28, 2008 at 9:07 AM

This point about the Democrats’ home-foreclosures “rescue” plan perhaps lets the cat out of the bag:

The five-year plan would apply only to owner-occupied homes and exclude investor-owned and second homes.

I have not been able to find the numbers on how many foreclosures are actually on primary residences, compared to second homes or investment (or speculative) properties.

The majority of MSM coverage emphasizes “people losing their homes.” Just how many people are really losing their homes, compared to losing a vacation home or speculative property? Does anyone have the numbers?

glendower on February 28, 2008 at 9:57 AM

“The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit.

“‘The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system,’ he said.
“That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history… Stiglitz said.”

This strike me as quite a stretch. While low interest rates certainly encouraged irresponsible lenders to offer cheap mortgages to people who wouldn’t otherwise qualify (applauded by liberals, we might add), and while the practice of selling off ‘derivatives’ of those mortgages created an unsupported house of cards, I’ve never heard anyone claim that deficit spending after September 11th and after the Iraq campaign started had anything to do with the short-term interest rates.

As I recall, the Fed was ratcheting up interest rates over the past few years, in response to inflation fears, until we had the mortgage balloon burst a few months ago. I expect higher rates had something to do with that, as adjustable rates kicked in at a much higher level than the original ‘sub-prime’ loans.

If you read the article on Stiglitz’s claims, it is clear that he is an extreme left-winger, and is wildly exaggerating the cost of the Iraq campaign, throwing everything into that kitchen sink that he can. I suspect an axe to grind, not unlike some other ‘Nobel Prize winners’.

MrLynn on February 28, 2008 at 10:09 AM

The majority of MSM coverage emphasizes “people losing their homes.” Just how many people are really losing their homes, compared to losing a vacation home or speculative property? Does anyone have the numbers?

glendower on February 28, 2008 at 9:57 AM

Excellent question. I’ve wondered the same thing myself.

MrLynn on February 28, 2008 at 10:12 AM

As senator Clinton has brought more than 200,000 jobs to New York……………..no wait that was what she said she would do. Actual results differ by about 200,000.

jukin on February 28, 2008 at 10:33 AM

The majority of MSM coverage emphasizes “people losing their homes.” Just how many people are really losing their homes, compared to losing a vacation home or speculative property? Does anyone have the numbers?

glendower on February 28, 2008 at 9:57 AM

If you put no money down and have inerest only loans are not you actually renting the house? I don’t see what a person/family in that situation has lost.

jukin on February 28, 2008 at 10:34 AM

…Clinton spent almost three hours…

What, is she channelling Fidel? During a campaign don’t you make the pitch and move so that you can make the pitch again down the road?

thegreatbeast on February 28, 2008 at 11:44 AM

The majority of MSM coverage emphasizes “people losing their homes.” Just how many people are really losing their homes, compared to losing a vacation home or speculative property? Does anyone have the numbers?

glendower on February 28, 2008 at 9:57 AM

If you put no money down and have inerest only loans are not you actually renting the house? I don’t see what a person/family in that situation has lost.

jukin on February 28, 2008 at 10:34 AM

Maybe that explains what they have been saying about all of the empty and foreclosed condos in Florida.

cjs1943 on February 28, 2008 at 11:48 AM

absent any intervening circumstances

Gee, maybe she meant that absent some unforeseen incident … like a terrorist attack … the economy will be the number one issue, otherwise the unforeseen event might put other issues such as national security on the forefront.

She did not say anything wrong here. To claim she did just undermines your credibility when some real nonsense spills out of her pie hole.

tommylotto on February 28, 2008 at 12:05 PM

Mr Lynn stated…

“If you read the article on Stieglitz’s claims, it is clear that he is an extreme left-winger, and is wildly exaggerating the cost of the Iraq campaign, throwing everything into that kitchen sink that he can. I suspect an axe to grind, not unlike some other ‘Nobel Prize winners’.”

I did read the article, that’s why I corrected my original link to his piece.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23286149-2703,00.html

While I can’t account for Mr. Stieglitz’s politics; the fact that he’s an economics academic and a Nobel Prize winner… “wildly exaggerating the cost of the Iraq campaign, throwing everything into that kitchen sink that he can.”… Would leave him rather vulnerable and open to harsh objective criticism by his peers…?

Academics making totally unbridled, irresponsible statements with respect to their field of expertise are something that they are not wont to exercise for fear of just such peer review or repudiation.

Perhaps your “kitchen sink” metaphor lacks a bit of credibility, itself…?

J_Gocht on February 28, 2008 at 1:22 PM

My apologies…

I’m definitely up to speed posting links on this site.

The URL should be…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23286149-2703,00.html

J_Gocht on February 28, 2008 at 1:55 PM

Now that Iraq is going so well, she’s hoping for a return to “The Economy, Stupid”.

Tzetzes on February 28, 2008 at 2:05 PM

That’s why so many of us want Congress to act to keep the tax rates from increasing in 2010 by making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Every time I read or hear that I cringe. The single biggest impediment to getting the tax cuts made permanent is using the the word permanent. Lot’s of people think that’s going too far since they don’t realize it only means to raise them again would merely require Congress to act. If we could frame the debate so that we say we need to eliminate the sunset provisions so that taxes wouldn’t automatically go up we would instantly have more support for the idea.

RW_theoriginal on February 28, 2008 at 2:21 PM

Now that Iraq is going so well, she’s hoping for a return to “The Economy, Stupid”.
-Tzetzes on February 28, 2008 at 2:05 PM

Imaginative. Yet shockingly consistent. She can’t let go of the “I’m the EXPERIENCED one” shtick either. It’s not working, so she wants to reach for “It’s the economy, stupid”?

Bambi should look her dead in the eye if they ever debate again, and shoot her a Reagan-esque “There you GO again”, and add “It’s the NEW blood, stupid!”

The Clinton’s are in serious denial. They’re TRULY totally, utterly STUCK IN TIME WARP. They’re reaching for what USED to work for them, but doesn’t anymore.

And that’s because they’re simply too close to the situation to recognize a blinding glimpse of the obvious: The reason why the libs are swooning over Bambi is EXTREMELY SIMPLE:

“It’s because he’s not THEM.”

Shirotayama on February 28, 2008 at 2:22 PM