The Most Ridiculous Thing Bill Clinton Has Ever Said

The meltdown continues, with a bit of hyperbole that even Hugh Hewitt would envy:

“I go to Nelson Mandela’s birthday party every year and we’re still very close. I believe if Yitzhak Rabin had not been murdered in 1995 we would have peace in the Middle East. I loved him as much as anyone I’ve ever known.

“But if you said to me today, ‘I’m gonna give you one last job for your country  — go and do this — but it’s hazardous and you may not get out with life and limb intact and you have to do it alone except I’ll let you take one other person,’ and I had to pick one person whom I knew who would never blink, who would never turn back, who would make great decisions under pressure and would never forget what the purpose of being there was, I would pick Hillary of the people I’ve known and I would never even think about it. It would be an easy choice.”

It’s so gratifying to see voters reject Clintonism. Not only is Hillbot losing, but her vastly overrated, corrupt husband’s vaunted legacy is also taking a hit.

Wonder how ol’ Lonesome Rhodes is dealing with the onset of irrelevance.

Because a Black Man Doesn’t Represent Change At All

Media_httpatlmalconte_tuwuf

Desperate times call for a desperate strategy:

And with the nomination on the line, Clinton explicitly mentioned gender as part of her appeal. “I think I am an agent of change. I embody change,” she said. “I think having the first woman president is a huge change, with consequences across the country and the world.”

Has Obama ever said a vote for a black man is a vote for change? Nope. It’s the message, stupid. I sense a blowout Tuesday — Obama winning by double digits. Meanwhile, the establishment weeps:

Mary Louise Hancock, the 87-year-old grande dame of the state’s Democrats, said she “resented” that independent voters were poised to influence the outcome of the Democratic primary, saying it turned the vote into a “personal-liking affair” dominated by “students and the trendies.”

Because only partisan hags, er, hacks, should decide elections.

A Rare Moment of Insight

I’m usually wrong, but this post from April should qualify me for an award from the local association of amateur pundits. In predicting an Obama victory, I offered the following rationales:

*The Hillary factor. Fifty percent of Americans don’t like Hillary. I suspect that number will grow the more they’re exposed to her programmed campaign. Being Bill Clinton’s wife is not enough. I think you’ll see Obama trounce her in New Hampshire, a la McCain over Bush in 2000. But whereas McCain lacked the resources — and any establishment support — to maintain his momentum, Obama should have no such troubles;

*He’s new. Hillary certainly can’t say that. Nor can Edwards. Obama represents a sea change — in philosophy, appeal and approach — from Bush and the dreaded “politics as usual.” Young people will flock to his campaign in numbers that will make his opponents drool;

*He’s black. That’s no longer a drawback. The people who would not support an African-American candidate aren’t going to vote for a Democrat regardless. And they’ll be vastly outnumbered by an increased black turnout that’ll go overwhelmingly to Obama. Moderate whites will be intrigued by his inclusiveness; he’s more Colin Powell than Al Sharpton;

*But isn’t he too liberal? He’d certainly be the most liberal White House occupant ever, but I don’t think he’ll run that way. And I doubt he’d govern that way. Look for him to follow (Bill) Clinton’s lead, running as a centrist and governing center-left. His voting record may speak differently, but ideology isn’t going to matter as much this go around.

Impressive, eh? My Iowa predictions were pretty spot on as well — I had Huckabee besting Romney (albeit narrowly) and Obama and Edwards finishing ahead of Hillbot.

I’ll call New Hampshire tomorrow, though I’m guessing hubris overwhelms my recent prescience.

A Rare Moment of Insight

I’m usually wrong, but this post from April should qualify me for an award from the local association of amateur pundits. In predicting an Obama victory, I offered the following rationales:

*The Hillary factor. Fifty percent of Americans don’t like Hillary. I suspect that number will grow the more they’re exposed to her programmed campaign. Being Bill Clinton’s wife is not enough. I think you’ll see Obama trounce her in New Hampshire, a la McCain over Bush in 2000. But whereas McCain lacked the resources — and any establishment support — to maintain his momentum, Obama should have no such troubles;

*He’s new. Hillary certainly can’t say that. Nor can Edwards. Obama represents a sea change — in philosophy, appeal and approach — from Bush and the dreaded “politics as usual.” Young people will flock to his campaign in numbers that will make his opponents drool;

*He’s black. That’s no longer a drawback. The people who would not support an African-American candidate aren’t going to vote for a Democrat regardless. And they’ll be vastly outnumbered by an increased black turnout that’ll go overwhelmingly to Obama. Moderate whites will be intrigued by his inclusiveness; he’s more Colin Powell than Al Sharpton;

*But isn’t he too liberal? He’d certainly be the most liberal White House occupant ever, but I don’t think he’ll run that way. And I doubt he’d govern that way. Look for him to follow (Bill) Clinton’s lead, running as a centrist and governing center-left. His voting record may speak differently, but ideology isn’t going to matter as much this go around.

Impressive, eh? My Iowa predictions were pretty spot on as well — I had Huckabee besting Romney (albeit narrowly) and Obama and Edwards finishing ahead of Hillbot.

I’ll call New Hampshire tomorrow, though I’m guessing hubris overwhelms my recent prescience.

I Feel the Words Building Inside Me, I Can’t Stop Them, Or Tell You Why I Say Them, But As I Reach the Top of the Bridge These Words Come To Me In a Whisper. I Say These Words As a Prayer, As Regret, As Praise, I Say: Romney, Romney

Writing as orgasm, compliments of Romney boy toy Hugh Hewitt:

This was the first well-managed debate and Romney had the best of all of his debate showings.

Oliver Wendall Holmes once famously remarked about FDR that the president had a A “second-class intellect but a first-class temperament.”

Tonight’s debate –by far the best of this long campaign– allowed Mitt Romney to display not only a first class temperament but also a first class intellect.

As assessed by a first class tool.

The Danger of Closed Primaries

Open primaries typically produce candidates with broad appeal, mavericks who aren’t afraid to challenge party orthodoxy. Eliminate independents and crossover voters from the process and you end up with divisive nominees who advance by placating their base. And who makes up the respective bases? Shrill partisans, mainly, people like Hugh Hewitt and Terry McAuliffe.

Guess who’s banking on this decidedly undemocratic system:

For what it’s worth, Mike and I ran into a Clinton insider last night who offered an additional twist on this argument: Not only does Clinton do better among registered Democrats than she does among independents and Republicans. But he thought registered Democrats would be especially inclined to give her a second look after Iowa and New Hampshire because they’d resent having their nominee chosen by a bunch of interlopers.

Bush used this strategy to beat McCain in 2000. Think of this way: In a general election, would McCain have defeated Bush? Would Obama trump Hillary?

Could there be a stronger argument against closed primaries? Shouldn’t voters have more influence than parties?

(No, no, no and yes.)

The Nonideological Revolution

MrsmithVoters like to say they support the candidate, not the party. Until this election, most voters were lying.

But after nearly two decades of slick and smug, Americans appear desperate for a president they can trust — maybe even admire. They want Mr. Smith, or at least the closest we can get nowadays (not very).

Obama has been the chief beneficiary. His campaign has eschewed the negative, bolstering his appeal as a unifier. On the GOP side, McCain and Huckabee have thrived largely because of their authenticity. Meanwhile, shrill divisiveness and phony pandering has doomed the candidacies of Hillbot and The Anchorman.

Whether this is a blip, a trend or a tide remains to be seen, but everyone who’s not a blind partisan should be encouraged.

And Bush 41 should feel vindicated — character, it seems, really does count, at least in 2008.

The Most Ridiculous Thing Bill Clinton Has Ever Said

The meltdown continues, with a bit of hyperbole that even Hugh Hewitt would envy:

"I go to Nelson Mandela’s birthday party every year and we’re still very close. I believe if Yitzhak Rabin had not been murdered in 1995 we would have peace in the Middle East. I loved him as much as anyone I’ve ever known.

"But if you said to me today, ‘I’m gonna give you one last job for your country  — go and do this — but it’s hazardous and you may not get out with life and limb intact and you have to do it alone except I’ll let you take one other person,’ and I had to pick one person whom I knew who would never blink, who would never turn back, who would make great decisions under pressure and would never forget what the purpose of being there was, I would pick Hillary of the people I’ve known and I would never even think about it. It would be an easy choice."

It’s so gratifying to see voters reject Clintonism. Not only is Hillbot losing, but her vastly overrated, corrupt husband’s vaunted legacy is also taking a hit.

Wonder how ol’ Lonesome Rhodes is dealing with the onset of irrelevance.

Because a Black Man Doesn’t Represent Change At All

Hillary_2Desperate times call for a desperate strategy:

And with the nomination on the line, Clinton explicitly mentioned gender as part of her appeal. "I think I am an agent of change. I embody change," she said. "I think having the first woman president is a huge change, with consequences across the country and the world."

Has Obama ever said a vote for a black man is a vote for change? Nope. It’s the message, stupid. I sense a blowout Tuesday — Obama winning by double digits. Meanwhile, the establishment weeps:

Mary Louise Hancock, the 87-year-old grande dame of the state’s Democrats, said she "resented" that independent voters were poised to influence the outcome of the Democratic primary, saying it turned the vote into a "personal-liking affair" dominated by "students and the trendies."

Because only partisan hags, er, hacks, should decide elections.