Home | Hegemony | Archives | Blogroll | Resume | Links | RSS Feed | subscribe by email    


to Reason


blog roll

    for the greater good of our own particular stupid wastes of money..., 2008-01-10 17:12:50 | Main | If the CIA had just waterboard..., 2008-01-14 11:49:23

    billary obama 2008: balancing firmly on nothing:

    One corollary of Clinton's tacking her years decorating the White House and bogarting healthcare reform onto her resume is that if she takes credit for Bill's record, she might as well get the blame with it. Whether she actually did get any experience while she was there is inscrutable. Clintonoids made that experience the substance of the campaign, then turn around and argue she didn't acquire any.

    In this light, what to make of Hillary attacking Obama for being too liberal over mandatory sentencing?

    While the senator was vague, her campaign pointed out to ABC News examples of Obama's liberal positions. In 2004, Obama said he would vote to abolish mandatory minimum sentences for federal crimes.

    At first this makes perfect sense, given Hillary's experience encouraging three-strike mandatory sentencing across the country, but then she's already turned around and attacked the policy she has experience supporting as having "a discriminatory impact", taking up Obama's "liberal position" as her own.

    Virtually everything her campaign has tossed Obama's way seems to work just as well if not better as an attack when you flip the names around, or maybe just replace every occurance of Obama with Hillary, and let her attack herself. That works fine in this instance.

    It'd also work just as well with Bill's attack on Obama's dubious anti-war record, when he was just spinning his own shitpile of a fairy tale, without so much as a nice anti-war speech to prop it up.

    With virtually the same positions, Obama has just had less time to reverse all of them. If somebody had a gun to my head and forced me to pick between the lesser of two slug monsters, I suppose I'd pick the one with the shorter trail of slime.

    And that's as far as it goes. They have no positions on the drug war or its attendant insanities otherwise. For Obama, this is a matter of dumb luck turning into a gross hypocrasy. For Clinton, it's an evasion of her years of experience in prosecuting said criminal disaster.

    I suppose Billary Obama has triangulated a unified position on it: nowhere.

:: posted by buermann @ 2008-01-13 20:36:40 CST | link

    go ahead, express that vague notion

    your turing test:

journals, notes,
other curmudgeonry

- A Timeline -

Oil for Nothing:
US Holds On Humanitarian Supplies
Iraq: 1997-2001

the good book
and other cultural

The Autobiography
Mother Jones

Contact Info: