<p>I don’t think she should ever quit! She is good for the economy - in fact, her campaigns are probably the best thing she ever did for it.</p>
<p>Dianne Feinstein was a city councilperson in San Francisco who inherited the mayoralty when the mayor was assassinated! Then she was the mayor. Do you think Hillary Clinton, as the politically-involved wife of the Governor of Arkansas, as the politically-involved wife of a candidate for the Presidency who was elected to that office, as a First Lady conducting (unsuccessfully) a major policy initiative, and diplomatic visits on her own, didn’t develop the skills to match a city councilperson or mayor? Puh-leeze! (I, too, like Dianne Feinstein a lot. She was a good city councilperson, a good mayor, and she’s a good Senator.)</p>
<p>Here are a couple of other differences between Hillary Clinton and Dianne Feinstein: Diane Feinstein married a young lawyer, too. Then divorced him. After that, when she was going into politics, she married twice more, both times to wealthy, successful men (the second a centimillionaire) who supported her career (and, in the second case, stood to benefit plenty from it). She lived and worked in the community where she grew up, and where her father was an important figure. She was mayor of a rich, liberal city during a period when it was becoming infinitely more rich and more liberal – a city so liberal she was a conservative there.</p>
<p>So, sure, that’s what Hillary should have done if she wanted to be a big-time politician. Ditched Bill’s sorry butt after a few years in Arkansas, taken her daughter back to Chicago, married a Pritzker or something, played footsie with the Democratic Party, and run for office in a district like Hyde Park. Why not?</p>
<p>There’s a primal scene I imagine. I imagine it happened more than once. A young woman, a religious young woman, is praying herself through a horrible personal crisis. Her life is tied to a man who can’t stay out of other women’s beds. He is in a position to do great good in the world, but he needs her help to do it, and he needs her financial support and discreet complicity, too. If she leaves him, she destroys his career. If she leaves him, her career where she lives – a place naturally hostile to her, where she has never fit in – is over, too. She would have to take their daughter thousands of miles away from her father to start over. She knows her position is untenable. How did life get so complicated? How did her ideals get so compromised? All the feminist friends of her youth warned her about this, about tying her life to a man who would stomp all over it, about tying herself to a child, about putting herself in a position where she had to mother two children, one of them out of control. And in a fishbowl no less, in a part of the country so forsaken that “Wellesley” and “Yale” had barely any magic. She can hardly ever be herself.</p>
<p>So she prays. She wants to be a good person. She wants to be a good woman. She wants to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God. Maybe she wants other things, too, but that is the standard she comes back to. What does the person who lives by those standards do? How is she different from Hillary Clinton?</p>
<p>How did her ideals get so compromised
Its a slippery slope- once you start fudging reality and surround yourself with people who are comfortable doing the same " I didn’t inhale/didn’t have sex" :rolleyes:- you can explain away anything eventually.</p>
<p>[I missed this article in 2003](<a href=“Businessweek - Bloomberg”>Businessweek - Bloomberg)</p>
<p>She didn’t stand aside while her husband killed half a million children. She didn’t vote for a war and aggressive, hostile occupation without reading the classified intelligence report she had in her possession and was elected to read. She didn’t stand in the Pork Zone in Iraq and praise the occupation three years later. She didn’t spend most of eight years raising $200 million dollars for her various campaigns while the public’s business went nowhere. She didn’t use her intelligence for 15 years to develop a health plan that forks over several extra trillions to private insurance companies, all the while collecting campaign contributions from them and their lobbyists.</p>
<p>She is VERY different from Hillary Clinton.</p>
<p>I would have added that I think Hillary loves Bill very much, and that is reason enough for her to have stayed with him, and I don’t fault her for it.</p>
<p>“sorry butt” – I love that, JHS!</p>
<p>What is that “killed a half million children” mini? Do you mean through sanctions in Iraq?</p>
<p>Does every politician give up his/her ideals? It seems like most do, over time. In ten or twenty years, what will we say about Barack Obama?</p>
<p>Paul Wellstone is perhaps one who didn’t compromise.</p>
<p>“What is that “killed a half million children” mini? Do you mean through sanctions in Iraq?”</p>
<p>I mean through the intentional bombing of wastewater treatment plants and the unilateral restrictions on simple antibiotics, anti-bacterials, anti-diarrheals, and replacement parts for the wastewater treatment equipment. I mean the genocide committed as per United Nations Resolution #260, Article 2, Section 3.</p>
<p>mini: you are recycling that crap too much.</p>
<p>Again, Mini, was that in Iraq, or where? (Too lazy to look up the UN Resolution.)</p>
<p>I think we Americans are too often ignorant of what our government does. In yesterday’s Star Tribune (Mpls. St. Paul) someone wrote in a letter to the editor that the U.S. is basically the savior of the world. I was surprised it was printed, but it does illustrated our widespread and perhaps willful ignorance.</p>
<p>Jeeze JHS, Feinstein has been a well regarded US senator, in her own right, for many, many years more years than she was the mayor! Her current popularity and standing with her constituants, which include millions more people than just the citizens of San Francisco, is not based on what she did as a councilman and mayor 30 years ago, or who she is or was married to. And she has not been repeatedly been reelected by the citizens of Calif. because of her husband’s [or father’s] coattails. I, and a lot of people I know, are not interested in having another president who would never have even been considered for the office if a family member hadn’t also been president. We have seen for the past 8 years the result of a “legacy” being given a political “boost” that wasn’t given to others.</p>
<p>And what happened between Hillary and her husband, should be immaterial as far as whether she is a better candidate for the Presidency.
Would an man running for the Presidency expect to gain or deserve a “sympathy vote” if it was discovered his wife was sleeping around and he decided to stick it out? I don’t think so.</p>
<p>menloparkmom:</p>
<p>I don’t disagree with you. I was just trying to point out the weird standards being applied to Clinton: she’s damned for assaulting traditional values, and damned for having lived by them.</p>
<p>And of course Feinstein hasn’t been elected to anything because of her husband’s coattails. But she was able to run for the Senate because of her husband’s financing. Hillary, too, in a way, but not until much later in her life.</p>
<p>Looks like the energizer bunny:</p>
<p>[Poll</a> Dancing: Hillary: Seat Michigan, Florida Delegates](<a href=“http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/polldancing/2008/02/hillary-seat-michigan-florida-delegates.php]Poll”>http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/polldancing/2008/02/hillary-seat-michigan-florida-delegates.php)</p>
<p>She’s not giving up.</p>
<p>Clinton would be elected over McCain. McCain would be elected over Obama.</p>
<p>Clinton would be elected over McCain. McCain would be elected over Obama.</p>
<p>and I drink beer just for the taste ;)</p>
<p>“Clinton would be elected over McCain. McCain would be elected over Obama.”</p>
<p>I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee. However I will campaign day and night for McCain if HRC is the nominee. And I know a throng of people just like me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course he is; because he is unwilling or unable (or both) to substantiate his wild claims, and will turn tail and refuse to discuss them when confronted about whether or not his claims are factual, he has to make up for the deficiencies in his point of view by repeating it a lot.</p>
<p>Michigan and Florida delegates won’t matter once TX and OH are in Obama’s column. And probably a whole bunch of Superdelegates and later PA more likely than not.</p>
<p>probably referring to this
[not Hill but Bill](<a href=“Bystanders to Genocide - The Atlantic”>http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200109/power-genocide</a>)</p>
<p>or perhaps this</p>
<p>[Mother Jones](<a href=“Guatemala: Bill Clinton’s Latest Damn-Near Apology – Mother Jones”>http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/1999/03/scoop10.html</a>
)</p>
<p>The genocide was pretty much common knowledge in Seattle if you were reasonably informed in the mid 90’s so for the POTUS to plead ignorance wasn’t believable
[The</a> Media and the Rwanda Genocide](<a href=“http://www.idrc.ca/openebooks/338-0/]The”>http://www.idrc.ca/openebooks/338-0/)</p>
<p>[Meow!](<a href=“Harpy, Hero, Heretic: Hillary – Mother Jones”>A-10 vs. F-35: The Air Force’s Latest Budget Bungle – Mother Jones)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It isn’t crap if it’s true. And The Truth is amazingly resilient. It can be recycled innumerable times and still be The Truth</p>
<p>too much cool aid in never never land</p>
<p>Wow. Check out this article. How can Clinton put together an economic plan for the country when she can’t even control campaign spending??</p>
<p>Why would someone who is poor or middle class donate to a campaign like this?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22clinton.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&adxnnlx=1203771801-%20pRl4f1kWFpK0fHVVB2m6g[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22clinton.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&adxnnlx=1203771801-%20pRl4f1kWFpK0fHVVB2m6g</a></p>
<p>“Nearly $100,000 went for party platters and groceries before the Iowa caucuses, even though the partying mood evaporated quickly. Rooms at the Bellagio luxury hotel in Las Vegas consumed more than $25,000; the Four Seasons, another $5,000. And top consultants collected about $5 million in January, a month of crucial expenses and tough fund-raising.”</p>
<p>"“The problem is she ran a campaign like they were staying at the Ritz-Carlton,” Mr. Trippi said. “Everything was the best. The most expensive draping at events. The biggest charter. It was like, ‘We’re going to show you how presidential we are by making our events look presidential.’ ”</p>