Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Quote of the Day

    Posted by Chicago Boyz Archive on April 30th, 2007 (All posts by )

    “Having been a senator during 9/11, I understand the extraordinary horror of that kind of attack,” she said. “I think a president must move as swiftly as is prudent to retaliate. That doesn’t mean we go looking for other fights. Let’s focus on those who have attacked us and do everything we can to destroy them.”

    Hillary Clinton

     

    18 Responses to “Quote of the Day”

    1. jimbino Says:

      Right Hillary, I wasn’t a senator at the time, so I can’t possibly understand the extraordinary horror of the attack. Hillary’s speech consists of one non-sequitur following another.

    2. Jonathan Says:

      I didn’t watch the debate. However, I note that there is some controversy about what she actually said.

    3. Verity Says:

      She was trying to sound presidential.

    4. Lexington Green Says:

      It is the first damn thing out of her mouth I have ever agreed with, I think.

      Hence its exalted status as a quote of the day.

      She has got her script memorized on this point.

      Credit where credit is due — I like this script. Good strong words: retaliate, destroy.

      OK, so one cheer for Hillary for a change.

    5. Max Says:

      Weasel worded. “focus on those who have attacked us” The subtext is “not Iraq.”

    6. Lexington Green Says:

      Not really weasel words. She is being clear that Iraq was a mistake. Large majorities now believe that, including most of the people who initially supported the war.

    7. Jonathan Says:

      The quote is full of weasel words. Look at the full text of what she said (from the page I linked to in my previous comment):

      Having been a senator during 9/11, I understand very well the extraordinary horror of that kind of an attack and the impact that it has, far beyond those that are directly affected. I think a president must move as swiftly as is prudent to retaliate. If we are attacked, and we can determine who is behind that attack, and if there are nations that supported or gave material aid to those who attacked us, I believe we should quickly respond. Now, that doesn’t mean we go looking for other fights. You know, I supported President Bush when he went after Al Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan. And then when he decided to divert attention to Iraq, it was not a decision that I would have made, had I been president, because we still haven’t found bin Laden. So let’s focus on those who have attacked us and do everything we can to destroy them.

      IMO you are fooling yourselves if you think she can be trusted, or is strong enough to lead effectively in a war.

    8. Jonathan Says:

      Let me add to my last comment. In Hillary’s position in the debate, a strong person might have said something like: “Knowing only what we knew then, I would have invaded Iraq. But it’s now clear that that was the wrong course of action. Unlike our current leaders who stubbornly refuse to face the facts about the difficult situation we are now in, and unlike some of my friends here tonight who are not adequately addressing the seriousness of the threat we face, I will, as president, take the initiative to defeat our enemies.”

      But she didn’t say that. She fudged, hiding in the crowd with all the other Democratic pols who have tacitly agreed to ignore the obvious irrelevance of hindsight judgment.

    9. Lexington Green Says:

      Ha. So, Hillary says something pretty good instead of awful, to a room full of Democrats yet, and we are supposed to say she should say something even better than most of the Republicans will probably spew out? If wishes were horses beggars would ride, sir. I think it is a miracle she said this much, given the attitude of the average Democrat primary voter. I neither like nor trust Hillary, and I will vote against her no matter who the GOP candidate is, if it comes to that. But I think it is interesting that she is running toward the center this early, and not saying that our enemies need to be hugged while we ask ourselves why they hate us.

    10. Ginny Says:

      Then again it may be an even more positive sign, kind of like the Intrades. Few hold their fingers to the wind as often as the Clintons. This may reflect a sense the surge might work and she’ll be the one left standing. Certainly, we will want a “serious” candidate – whether it works beautifully or becomes a disaster. Our faith in the mission may be tattered but, in the end, most would like it to succeed. And I doubt I’m the only one who’d rather have someone who sees it as worth doing than one who never did. We’d like someone who believes in the value of what we can do.

    11. Jonathan Says:

      You guys (i.e., Lex) are optimists. I don’t see Hillary being better than the other Democrats. All I see is that she is staking out a different tactical position from the others. It may be smart politics but it’s not clearly an indication of anything more substantial.

    12. Lexington Green Says:

      “All I see is that she is staking out a different tactical position from the others …”

      Of course.

      She has figured out that voters want a Commander in Chief who will destroy America’s enemies.

      That is a shaft of daylight into a darkened room. It is a plausible Democrat contender seeing the basic rationality of the situation, and seeing that the public will like it if she says these things.

      It is not much to be thankful for, I know. But my expectations from the Donks are pretty darn low right now.

    13. Jonathan Says:

      It’s better than nothing but let’s not overdo the praise. There are times when a national leader must do unpopular things. That is the nature of leadership. It doesn’t appear as though any of the Democratic candidates is qualified for the job.

    14. Lexington Green Says:

      “…let’s not overdo the praise…”

      Where did anybody “do” any “praise”, let alone overdo it?

      The passage is noteworthy, not praiseworthy.

    15. zenpundit Says:

      Hillary is not a stupid woman. She is more than capable of coherent and articulate argument. Her problem is that her real thoughts and natural mode of expressing them are highly obnoxious to most Americans who do not dwell in her circle of aging true believer loyalists.

      This kind of pablum serves her interests better, insincere as it is, than trying to speak extemporaneously.

    16. Helen Says:

      Didn’t Hillary say to another audience that she was ready to invade Iran? Well, virtually. It seems to me that she will say whatever she thinks will work at any given time. You cannot deduce anything from any particular comment or statement or speech.

    17. Methinks Says:

      “You know, I supported President Bush when he went after Al Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan. And then when he decided to divert attention to Iraq, it was not a decision that I would have made, had I been president, because we still haven’t found bin Laden. So let’s focus on those who have attacked us and do everything we can to destroy them.”

      WHAT a liar!!

      “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

      “There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I’ve followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. . . . I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way part of this decision.” – Hillary addresses Code Pink, March 7, 2003.

      “We must stay the course” in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and asked for more troops to finish the job…We have to exert all of our efforts militarily” – November 29, 2003 Hilary visits the troops In Iraq and Afghanistan

      I don’t even think the Clintons can even decipher the difference between the truth and a lie anymore.

    18. Methinks Says:

      As long as we’re on the topic of Hillary (unfortunately, my state senator), I thought I’d post the following excerpt from the Washington Post.

      “Schenectady Mayor Brian Stratton needed help: Bechtel Plant Machinery, a prominent local employer, had announced it was relocating to Pittsburgh.

      “On Nov. 15, Clinton called Stratton, Schumer and Rep. Michael R. McNulty (N.Y.) to her Senate office for a meeting with Bechtel officials. Stratton described Clinton as ‘totally enraged and totally engaged’ and said she demanded to see the data that had informed Bechtel’s decision.

      “Schumer reminded the executives that Bechtel relied heavily on federal contracts, that Democrats were now the majority party, and that Clinton was a member of the Armed Services Committee. Her presumed front-runner status for the 2008 Democratic nomination was never mentioned, Schumer said. But he described it as ‘the 800-pound gorilla in the room.’

      “Two weeks later, Bechtel announced it was suspending the move. Relocating remained the better option, Bechtel executive T.F. Hash wrote to the senators. But he added: ‘I am, however, mindful of the difficulties this decision has placed on our employees and the community.’

      The Washington Post was clearly lauding this as a politicial achievement. It just reminded me of a Thomas Jefferson quote: “when the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”