Published on FOXNews.com on February 28, 2008.
The real Hillary Clinton stood up at the Democratic presidential debate this week: angry, sarcastic, stubborn, secretive, arrogant, mired in the past, victim of the media, and still firmly convinced that she is uniquely entitled to the Democratic Party nomination and the presidency.
That Hillary hasn’t really been on display much since the debacle of her disastrous health care plan and the end of Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial, when she haughtily flaunted her combative personality.
Published on TheHill.com on February 26, 2008.
Whether one likes, dislikes, loves, hates, admires, fears, despises, or envies them, every Clinton watcher has this in common: They are dumbfounded both by the incompetence with which Hillary has run for president and her intransigence at sticking to a failed message. In a demonstration of inability and inflexibility reminiscent of her healthcare debacle of 1993-94, Mrs. Clinton seems destined to fulfill Voltaire’s description of the Bourbon kings of France: “They learn nothing. They forget nothing.”
The best evidence of Obama’s readiness to lead the nation is the ability with which he has run for president. After all, what is more difficult, complicated, or challenging than getting elected president? What other life experience better illustrates one’s qualification to hold the office than a manifest skill in seeking it. For anyone who has ever been elected president, the race that sent them to the White House was the single most important event in their lives and dwarfs any other experience they might have had before running.
Published in the New York Post on February 21, 2008.
Barack Obama’s victory in Wisconsin on Tuesday was just the latest sign that Hillary Clinton’s desperate, anti-democratic moves to salvage her bid for the Democratic nomination are destroying her last chances to win a fair fight.
Loudly and publicly, the Clintons proclaim that superdelegates should feel free to ignore the wishes of the folks back home and jam Hillary’s nomination through at the convention. They openly predict that they’ll demand the seating of the Michigan and Florida delegations, totally contravening the party’s rules.
Bill and Hillary Clinton and the geniuses who are running their campaign have done all they possibly could to lose in Wisconsin and their efforts have been rewarded! They publicly speculated that they would override the will of the voters and line up super delegate/bosses to vote for them regardless of how their districts and states voted. They spoke about using delegate credentials challenges over seating the Florida and Michigan delegations to overturn the will of the primaries. Bill Clinton’s volatile temper was on full display pitting the former president in a shouting match against a heckler. There has never been a run-up to a critical primary with less focus and discipline on the part of one of the candidates. It is as if the Clintons are above management and won’t submit to common sense suggestions from their obviously cowed staff.
It is as if the lunatics are running the asylum and it shows!
Published on TheHill.com on February 19, 2008.
Congressmen and -women who believe that they can ignore the expressed will of their districts’ constituents and vote with impunity for whomever they want for president at the Democratic Convention had better think again. A vote for Clinton by a congressman whose district backed Obama is likely to become the single most dangerous vote the member has ever cast.
If Obama loses the nomination, all will be forgotten, if not forgiven. But if he wins and gets elected, as I think he will, don’t expect much mercy from his enraged supporters. Voting one way while one’s district votes the other is the stuff from which primary challenges emerge!
The more the Clinton campaign talks about using super delegates to override the will of the people and using the credentials fight over Michigan and Florida to nullify Obama’s victories, the more she is creating those very victories by showing how old line, arrogant, and authoritarian she and her campaign really is. The image the campaign is presenting to the electorate is uniformly negative. She is threatening to cast aside the will of the voters and to coast to victory sponsored by the entitled establishment of the party. This is a recipe for losing so many primaries and so many caucuses that she can’t win no matter how many strings she pulls. That is precisely the situation in which she finds herself. By trumpeting her survival strategy to anyone who will listen, she nullifies the chances she had to survive the primaries and caucuses with a lead.
It was President’s Day in February, 1995 and I was meeting with President Clinton in the White House. He burst into the room and gushed “I just met with the reporters and they asked me ‘if you could ask your idol, John F. Kennedy, one question on President’s Day, what would it be?.'” I wondered what the rest of the story would bring. I was an innocent in those days, only vaguely aware of the rumors of his past…and future. “I wanted to say ‘how did you do it? Was there a secret stairway or closet I don’t know about?’ But I couldn’t so I asked ‘what was it like to be president before people were alienated?'”
While polls still show Hillary leading Obama in Texas and also in Ohio, her lead will likely fade and likely disappear by the time their primaries are held two weeks hence.
If Obama wins in Wisconsin, he’ll probably also carry Ohio, a state with very similar demographics. Neither state has much in the way of Hispanic voters (Only 2% of Ohio is Latino) or recent immigrants, the two key groups that gave Hillary the edge in California, Arizona, and New Mexico.
Published on FOXNews.com on February 15, 2008.
Who was it that defined neurosis as repeating the same mistake again and again, and expecting a better outcome each time? That’s really what the Clinton campaign is doing in its post-Chesapeake primary strategy. Now Hillary defines Obama as the candidate who makes speeches, while she is the one who provides “answers” and “solutions.”
Why is Hillary embracing this new line? It’s not that she has any great record of solutions or answers of which to boast, but rather that she wants to highlight Obama’s lack of a legislative record. Once again, she and her campaign geniuses are making the same mistake they made when they decided to use the experience as their defining difference with Obama. It’s not that she had much, but they sensed an opportunity to highlight that he had even less.