Go to Ask.com


enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Page 1 of 3 (35 items)   1 2 3 Next >
Why Does Hillary Want To Be President?
by Artemesia
+3/-1 Reply

Do you think she really cares about what she says in her speeches? Do you think she is sincere? What do you think motivates her? Why do you think Hillary Clinton is running for President?
A

Why would I not believe her?
by biteoftheweek

In her history of Public service (and it is a looooooonnnng one), she has worked to do what she claimed she would.

Lousy job - why would anyone want it?
by FieldingBandolier

Maybe she's an idealistic sort who wants to put herself in a position to exert a potent, beneficial influence over the welfare of the country?

Or, of course, there's ego - but that's true of everybody who runs for president, isn't it?

My favorite (recent) line about her:

"Mrs. Clinton, we’re assured by sources right and left, tortures puppies and eats babies. But her policy proposals continue to be surprisingly bold and progressive."

From here.

We do this fascinating thing with our politicians in this country - we tacitly expect them to be pragmatic dealers, but then we use their pragmatism as evidence of their characterological deficiencies.

As a woman with the highest political ambitions, she's had to be more pragmatic than most of her various counterparts. This is a character flaw?

She'd be a great president, and I trust her sincerity, and her honesty, despite her tendency to "embellish" details. I mean, at least she hasn't made wild claims about inventing the internet, or somesuch.

No one can run for that office without
by justoffal

a fair amount of hubris and a huge amount of ambition. However I do not think we would want a leader lacking in either of those qualities to any great extent.

Re: Why Does Hillary Want To Be President?
by ChicagoEngineer
She's running for the same reasons the others are running, one part ambition and one part believing she'd be the best choice. Though she isn't my first choice, I do believe she'd be a huge step up from what we've had of late.
Re: Why would I not believe her?
by Artemesia

biteoftheweek..

Hillary's record of Public Service for the voting communuity on the grass roots level is in contrast to her corporate leanings and protectionism, though there, she excells in double talk, but always backtrack to how she defines issues..always covering her corporate pragmatic votes/views with global/for the good of/jargon:

1. Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India

In India, she defended American outsourcing of jobs--which benefits India enormously--and predicted that it would continue and grow. "Outsourcing will continue," Mrs. Clinton said in New Delhi. "There is no way to legislate against reality... We are not in favor of putting up fences." Hillary acknowledged the pressures to curb outsourcing: "I have to be frank," she said. "People in my country are losing their jobs, and the US policymakers need to address this issue."

2. Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights

Clinton supported most favored nation trade status despite concerns about China’s human rights record. “We have to use our our moral and material strengths in ways that serve our evolving interests,” she said. “We have to ask ourselves what hope does the global market hold for the tens of millions of victims of child labor, or for the 100 million street children without homes or families whom I’ve seen everywhere from Brazil to Mongolia who are being left to fend for themselves.”

P.S. What do 'Street children' have to do with her policy on rewarding China with most favored nation trade status? Always..watch her switch and bait..her apples & oranges mix in double talk.

And in 2001, She Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)

I'll post more about her record, but not so that it will run on for pages in one post.
A

Question:
by FieldingBandolier

There've been some good posts honoring Dr. King. What do you suppose would be said about that man, were he running for president today? What do you imagine might be said about him if he'd first served a term or two in the senate?

One of the consequences of doing things, and saying stuff, is that you leave yourself open to criticism. In the public sector, it doesn't even really matter if you have a subsequent change of heart, or if your decisions were taken out of the larger context in which they were made (as is typical of legislative actions), so long as your critics tenaciously pollute the continuing dialogue in characteristic, repetitious manner. Globalization and trade status are complex and evolving issues. Are you suggesting she is not thoughtful in her pursuit of policy on these matters?

I'm not here much these days, but I've repeatedly said I'd wholeheartedly support Obama as the Democratic candidate, should he win the nomination, even though I'd prefer Hillary. It's funny - I haven't seen ANY of the rather vocal Obama supporters hereabouts make a similar statement of support.

What do you suppose that's about?

I stand corrected...
by FieldingBandolier
assuming your first choice is Obama.
Re: Jesus...
by Demosthenes2

I wish I could rate replies or still star them or check mark them or some thing. Precisely.

Artem, I dig you but seriously. This notion that anyone else but Obama must be insincere or crazy is beneath you--and it's insulting to the people whose support you will ultimately need.

FB and I both prefer Clinton but will support Obama. It does no good to question the rival's sincerity. Only damage can accrue from this.

Well done FB--on both replies.

Re: I stand corrected...
by ChicagoEngineer

It is. I think they'd both be fine presidents. And despite recent polls, I think once the attention of democrats turns to what McCain has become, the passion we're seeing for Obama and Clinton will carry over into November.

Whomever doesn't win the nomination will support the winner. If I were a betting man, I'd be Obama wins, and I'd bet we'll be seeing Clinton as the majority (hopefully) leader in the senate before long. Even if she loses the primary, she's won a lot of political capital along the way. Tensions are just running high at this point.

Re: Lousy job - why would anyone want it?
by Artemesia

FieldingBandolier..

Hillary's values aren't Bushes..but they share:

"meg·a·lo·ma·ni·a
(mg-l-mn-, -mny) n. 1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence. 2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions."

(Such as being an acting Vice-Pres/Wife with Bill..and brokering peace with Northern Island..Then, she escaped with her life..under gunfire at the airport in Bosnia)..

What would she really do AT 3A:M if that Nat'l Security phone call came through? Bring her current nightmare with her to that telephone call..And, by the way, What a crock that fantasy phone call is! I can here her saying, Joan of Arc here, can I help you?

I know that politicians retouch their political photographs..But this lady has created her own self portrait of Dorian Grey...be it a kinder gentler one.

"mega·lo·mani·ac n. mega·lo·ma·nia·cal (-m-n-kl), mega·lo·manic (-mnk) adj.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

"ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms Noun 1. megalomania - a psychological state characterized by delusions of grandeur delusions of grandeur - a delusion (common in paranoia) that you are much greater and more powerful and influential than you really are mental disease, mental illness, psychopathy - any disease of the mind; the psychological state of someone who has emotional or behavioral problems serious enough to require psychiatric intervention."

(Remember Bushes "Mission Accomplished?" dressed in a flight suit? .. Looks like a shared case of tarmac fever between G & HRC).
A

Serial candidates are made, not born.
by Fritz Gerlich

Hillary and her husband are like royalty who cannot escape the effects of the adulation they are continually drenched with. Not necessarily its content, but the mere fact of its existence, which continually whispers the subliminal message, "You are important . . . you are important . . . you are needed . . ." One in such a position can reflect, "I am being flattered" and distrust the flatterer. But how often does s/he reflect that the mere fact of being flattered implies that one is a person of public consequence? And how often does s/he detach from that seductive truth? In my opinion, it would require excellent spiritual training and remarkable fortitude not to be slowly, silently, corroded by it.

Re: No one can run for that office without
by Artemesia
JO..
There are many who believe those are the main requirements..It makes them think 'Macho,' and go for it with both barrels blazing!
A
{Chuckle} Are you lecturing me...
by FieldingBandolier

on the subject of narcissism?

Thanks Demosthenes!
by FieldingBandolier

My take: it's fascinating to watch the variety of strategies people employ to circumvent their pesky, unresolved ambivalence.

But I'm sort of geeky that way.

Page 1 of 3 (35 items)   1 2 3 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML