WaPO: Hillary Hitting All the Sunday Talk Shows Has Perfected the Art of the Filibuster

[flpoljunkie]

Remind you of anyone? Say, a certain Ms. Rice? That was what I was thinking as Hillary droned on and on yesterday, saying very little.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/23/AR2007092301099.html

Hitting All the Sunday Talk Shows, Clinton Says a Lot but Reveals Little

By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 24, 2007; A04

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton appeared on all five talk shows yesterday morning and demonstrated a particularly senatorial skill: the art of the filibuster.

Asked by ABC's George Stephanopoulos whether she would withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq during a first term as president, Clinton (D-N.Y.) gave a simple answer: She did not know.

But she used more than 225 words to say so. "You know, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges, because I don't know what I'm going to inherit, George. I don't know and neither do any of us know what will be the situation in the region. How much more aggressive will Iran have become?" Clinton said. "What will be happening in the Middle East? How much more of an influence will the chaos in Iraq have in terms of what's going on in the greater region? Will we have pushed al-Qaeda in Iraq out of their strongholds with our new partnership with some of the tribal sheiks or will they have regrouped and retrenched?"

She continued: "I don't know, and I think it's not appropriate to be speculating. I can tell you my general principles and my goal. I want to end the war in Iraq. I want to do so carefully, responsibly, with the withdrawal of our troops, also, with the withdrawal of a lot of our civilian employees, the contractors who are there, and the Iraqis who have sided with us.

"We have a huge humanitarian refugee crisis on our hands. We have millions of Iraqis who have been displaced, some internally, some into other countries. The problems we're going to face because of the failed policies and the poor decision-making of this administration are rather extraordinary and difficult, and I don't want to speculate about how we're going to be approaching it until I actually have the facts in my hand and the authority to be able to make some decisions."

[wyldwolf]

1. LOL! Right. It wasn't Obama. Barack who??

[Maribelle]

2. Kornblut is a proven right wing liar.

Media Matters has debunked her lies many times.
http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/annekornblut

[flpoljunkie]

4. Weak! Don't like the message? Attack the messenger!

[Maribelle]

5. I proved she is not to be believed. You can wiggle out of it any way you want.

I couldn't care less.

[flpoljunkie]

7. The question is was Hillary filibustering or not? She obviously was.

[Maribelle]

9. What, the liar is reinventing the meaning of the word, and you're swearing to it?

fil·i·bus·ter
n (plural fil·i·bus·ters)
1. political delaying tactic: a tactic used to delay or prevent the passage of legislation
2. politics legislative obstructor: an obstructor of the passage of legislation
3. U.S. military military adventurer: a mercenary or irregular in a revolutionary army of a foreign country


Pick 1, 2 or 3. And please do chime in with the bush sock puppets that are hell bent on people believing their grotesque redefinitions, such as compassionate conservatives.

[flpoljunkie]

16. Used loosely to describe one whose answers tend to go on forever. Hillary shares this with Condi.

[paulk]

15. it's a legitimate attack, in this instance

if there is a clear bias, attacking the messenger is proper.

Kornblut seems virtually alone in her negative review of HRC's performance -

[CoffeeCat]

3. Can Hillary be any more pro war???

Hillary's statements could have been said by any pro-war Republican--or Joe Lieberman for that matter.

Not only is she making excuses for not ending the war immediately, as we should---she's pounding the Iran
war drum.

Look what she says, "I don't know...How much more aggressive will Iran have become".

Give me a break. Iran..."aggressive". They're developing an nuclear energy program. They say they have no
plans to make a bomb. The vast majority of experts contend that if they were making a bomb, it would be
10 years off. Yet, Hillary parrots the neocon warmongering talking points--as if Iran is an imminent threat
that must be dealt with immediately. Just like those PNAC bastards did with Iraq. Now, they want Iran, and
Hillary is oh-so delighted to perpetuate the pro-war rhetoric of the PNAC gang.

Are the Democrats really going to nominate a person like this...who helps the PNACers stick to their invading schedule?

The Iraq war was based on lies by a group of imperialist, warmongering criminals. It should end yesterday.
We should not be there at all. To prolong the war, with the excuse, "I want to end the war in Iraq...carefully
and responsibly."

We're not making a delicate souffle honey! We're talking about ending the worst American foreign policy failure
EVER!

Thank you Hillary for *at least* speaking the truth and revealing yourself as a warmonger. Anyone who is paying
attention can see that voting for you translates into more war, and more excuses. Hey maybe she'll start telling
us that Iraq is "turning a corner" or that our troops are "making progress" in her next tv appearance.

:eyes:

[Frances]

6. Give me a break

Bush broke it. And the next president will have to fix it.

Yes, I want our military out of Iraq. But for Hillary to say she doesn't know what the situation will be when the next president is sworn into office is not unreasonable. None of us knows that.

[FlaxieB]

8. Wasn't impressed with Hilary at all.

Her whirlwind of hitting all the political shows this past Sunday did not plant in my mind her attempt to view her as the candidate to support. Plus it was a set up to allow the public to visually and mentally see her as the candidate of choice. She continues to evade her decisions on the Iraq war and continues to display bad judgment in her ability to anticipate and see future problems. Instead, she prefers to blame others for her actions (vote for the war, blame Bush, First, blame yourself, she won't. A stubborn person who believe she's right. sounds familiar)? Plus her decision to vote on the Peterus ad was stupid. With the Iraq war as the main focal point, she allowed the Repubs, along with other Dems, to sucker her into a useless vote ploy to demean themselves. Plus adding insult to injury, the Repubs rejected the Dems Iraq vote last week. She voted no but why vote on the Peterus ad in the first place? The vote was total bullshit and she could not see that beforehand. What she should have done was walk out and call it for what it was, cheap political points. Commander In Chief? Common sense? Change candidate? What's need for this country? I don't so. She's educated but not smart enough. :banghead:

[Ethelk2044]

11. Agree with you 100% - She keeps allowing the repugs to set her agenda.

[Maribelle]

12. She is not evading her decisions on the Iraq war.

She was perfectly clear and honest that she needed to make decisions then.

And no one even bothered to ask her if she had multiple strategic contingency plans cued up, giving her the ability have decisions at the ready based on the conditions in Iraq after Bush has run out his fiasco, and bled our country dry.

[FlaxieB]

14. The "decision" was the war in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Remember?

Again, not smart enough, lack of common sense, gullible etc. If she could see that the war on terror was with Bin Laden in Afghanistan and not Saddam (no WMD) what can she do for this country except become the first female Prez? Pleeeeeeeeeeese gimme a break!! She needs to fess up and say those dreaded words I WAS WRONG!!! Should not be hard to do since you're asking americans to make you the leader of the free world. Leaders need to have the courage to admit mistakes. And what about her multiple strategic plans? If she had voted no to the Iraq war in the first place along with the other Dems who voted to go to Iraq her plans would not have been necessary to begin with, instead focus planning for Afghanistan. At this point, we would have make tremendous progress in the war on terror, capture Bin Laden and deal a major blow to Al Quida (if not completely eliminated them) As I said before, she not a forward thinker. She's "business as usual" politics. She's not needed.

[Ethelk2044]

10. She has peaked in the polls. Her numbers are beginning to show it.

The closer we get to election time. The people will make informed decisions. They will not want a person who takes both sides of an issue.

[BeyondGeography]

13. She had the art of the goofy cackle down, too

or maybe this is what going on five shows in one morning will do to you:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/preview/bcpid1184451801?syndicationoffer=uewiNWjoy35efHIQMCy61A%3D%3D