Tag Archives: Hillary Rodham Clinton

national news, political news

Come clean, Mme. Secretary

Hillary Rodham Clinton can put the email controversy to bed today. It might be finished. Then again, her foes well might decide to keep the flames going.

The former secretary of state will conduct a press conference in New York. She’ll take questions about the email tempest — the one involving her use of a private account while she ran the State Department.

I refuse to call this a “scandal” because it doesn’t rise that level. It is a problem, though, for the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-address-email-controversy-115903.html?hp=t1_r

Congressional investigators are trying to link some missing emails to the Benghazi matter involving the deaths of four Americans in September 2012 at the U.S. consulate in Libya. That’s the politics of it: Republicans keep smelling blood and keep looking to inflict a mortal wound to Clinton’s budding presidential candidacy.

In a strange way, I see this controversy developing the way the Barack Obama “birther” controversy was kept alive before withering away.

Those on the far right kept insisting that Obama wasn’t constitutionally qualified to serve as president because, they said, he was born in Africa. He wasn’t. The president said he was born in Hawaii. The controversy persisted until the night of Obama’s re-election in November 2012.

I have a strong suspicion that the email matter will keep boiling throughout this year and most of next — until when or if Hillary Clinton is elected president of the United States.

Still, it’s good that she’ll seek to quiet the storm today.

We’re all ears, Mme. Secretary.

 

Uncategorized

O'Reilly sees the light on name-calling?

Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly had an eye-opening commentary Wednesday night in which he said Republicans should avoid name-calling and “smearing” of Democrats, namely President Obama and the woman who wants to succeed him, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/bill-oreilly-obama-insults-2016-elections-115526.html?hp=l3_4

I don’t know what to make of this.

O’Reilly said this, according to Politico: “But any Republican candidate who says personal things about either the president or Mrs. Clinton will be making a tremendous mistake,” he added. Most Americans don’t like that line of attack, he said. “Once in a while, a takedown is necessary, but to make a living out of guttersniping” would be a “ticket to defeat,” he commented. “Smearing anyone should be unacceptable.”

So, let’s backtrack a few days. Mother Jones published a scathing report questioning O’Reilly’s coverage of the Falklands War in 1982. O’Reilly went immediately on the attack. What did he call David Corn, a co-writer of the lengthy essay? Why, an “irresponsible guttersnipe,” of course.

O’Reilly is correct to caution Republicans about the personal attacks. The Politico link attached to this post details some of the points he made on his “O’Reilly Factor” talk show.

However, whenever anyone gets under his skin and riles the fellow, O’Reilly is pretty quick to pull the hair-trigger on those who disagree with him.

Still, let’s hope he follows his own advice. Then again, his visible and vocal righteous anger is a big part of what draws his audience to his show.

medical news

Now it's vaccines that divide the parties

 

It’s official. There is no limit at all to the categories of issues that divide Republicans and Democrats.

The issue today is childhood vaccines. Yep. Believe it. Republicans are now raising the issue of whether parents deserve some choice in whether their to vaccinate their children against diseases deemed infectious and a hazard to public health.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/231547-clinton-science-is-clear-vaccines

At no time rearing our two now-grown sons did my wife and I ever — not a single time — wonder whether we should forgo a mandatory childhood vaccine in order to, say, enroll our boys in public school. Yes, the issue has percolated for decades, but in our household we never got all hot and bothered over whether the school system where our kids would enroll required such vaccines.

But here we go. A presidential campaign is just around the corner and one of the potential GOP candidates, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is making an issue of the vaccines.

Likely Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton posted a tweet that lays it out clearly: “The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and . Let’s protect all our kids.”

Goodness, gracious. The vaccines protect our children against some serious infectious diseases. You’ve heard of how measles can cause blindness; chicken pox produces lifelong cells that lead to shingles later in life; mumps, pertussis and all manner of fevers can be fatal.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, another Republican thinking of running for president, walked back a statement in which he said parents should have the choice.

The vaccine issue flares up from time to time — kind of like a toddler’s fever. How about icing this one down and recognize the value that mandatory vaccines bring in protecting our children and inoculating the public against these serious diseases?

 

business news, International news, national news, political news

Economy now off the table for 2016 campaign?

Let’s allow this declaration: Barring an unexpected collapse that could occur at any moment, the state of the nation’s economy will not be an issue in the 2016 campaign for president of the United States.

The Labor Department released more job numbers today. They’re good.

The economy added 252,000 jobs in December; unemployment fell from 5.8 percent to 5.6 percent.

Is it a perfect score? No. Wages took a slight dip in December, compared to the substantial growth they showed the previous month.

Republican contenders for the White House, though, are going to have to look beyond our borders for issues to toss against Democrats — namely against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Those opportunities aren’t going to be that easy to exploit against the former secretary of state, former U.S. senator, former first lady and prohibitive frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The economy? Well, I’ve noted before how the Obama administration took bold steps early on to stop the free fall it inherited when Barack Obama took the presidential oath on Jan. 20, 2009.

The economy is picking up considerable steam now.

The war on terror? It’s still going on. Yes, the president said the “war on terror is over.” He misspoke. The nation continues to hunt down killers, who continue to strike at innocent victims, such as those most recently in Paris.

Let’s face this cold, harsh fact: The war on terror is unlike any war we’ve ever fought. There will be no way to declare victory. The 9/11 attacks brought forward what intelligence analysts and deep-cover agents have known all along, that terrorists are out there plotting against us.

That fight will go on, and on, and on.

At home, though, the economy has recovered.

political news

'Officially exploring' means Jeb is in

1 Comment

Take this to the bank. It’s a lock. Done.

Jeb Bush is running for president of the United States in 2016.

Yes, another Bush is, um, beating the bushes for votes. He wants to become the third member of his immediate family to occupy the White House. George H.W. “Poppy” Bush served from 1989 until 1993; big bro George W. served from 2001 to 2009.

The Bush “brand” is well established, correct?

And what do the first two Bushes have in common? They presided over an economy that tanked.

It Poppy’s case, the economy cost him re-election in 1992. As for W, the “Great Recession” caused untold grief for millions of Americans who watched their retirement investments vanish into thin air.

OK, were either recessions the direct result of the men’s presidencies? As I’ve noted before, presidents don’t deserve all the blame when things go wrong any more than they deserve all the credit for when things go right.

But these events happened on their respective watches.

And that is the “brand” that Jeb will have to overcome.

Voters’ memories are long, you know?

But Jeb Bush has a record of his own as a former Florida governor. It’s a decent one at that. The state ran well under his governorship. And I do like his moderate stand on immigration reform, which is natural, given that he’s married to a Mexican woman.

He shouldn’t take too seriously the notion that a Republican moderate is doomed to lose the next election. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said as much. But hey, the Cruz Missile is considering a presidential run as well and no one with an ounce of sanity ever is going to suggest Cruz is a moderate on anything.

Bush is yet another old shoe set to run for president. The Democrats have their own in Hillary Rodham Clinton.

My own GOP preference remains Mitt Romney, who’s now sounding as though he, too, will start “actively exploring” a campaign of his own.

This will be fun to watch, yes?

 

political news

Run, Mitt, run!

The word is leaking out in dribs and drabs.

Mitt Romney is thinking about running for president one more time in 2016.

I think that’s pretty cool.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/mitt-romney-2016-run-113518.html?hp=t1_r

Mitt’s most recent run for the presidency came up short, of course. Ann Romney, the GOP nominee’s much better half, was said to have dismissed the notion of yet another presidential campaign. Now, however, Politico reports that insiders think Mitt’s giving serious thought to one more run for the White House.

(FYI: I want to refer to the former Massachusetts governor by his first name because everyone in America has done that with Hillary Rodham Clinton. If Democrats can claim a first-name-only potential candidate, then Republicans deserve one, too.)

Why do I want Mitt to run again? Well, it’s not that I think he’s the best Republican considering a run. Nor is it that I intend to vote for him in 2016 were he to be nominated.

It’s because I think he’s a lot smarter than he demonstrated during his 2012 effort, starting with that awkward primary campaign and his performance in some of those talent show/debates with the likes of Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann.

Who can forget when he offered lay down a $10,000 bet with Texas Gov. Rick Perry? Who in the world would blurt out a 10 grand wager offer? Most of us out here in Flyover Country would settle for a steak dinner or six-pack of beer. Not Mitt, the man with bulging money bags.

Or how about the time he said the $300,000 he earned one year in speaking fees amounted to just a little bit of money? When you’re worth zillions, then I suppose that is just walking-around money.

I’m a firm believer in redemption. Everyone deserves a chance to correct the record, or perhaps even rewrite the record.

That includes politicians.

Mitt thinks the potential GOP field is weak. He wants his party to win back the White House. He thinks he’s the man to restore his party’s standing. According to Politico: “He has assessed various people’s strengths and weaknesses dispassionately, wearing what one ally called his ‘consultant cap’ to measure the field. He has said, among other things, that Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, would run into problems because of his business dealings, his work with the investment banks Lehman Brothers and Barclays, and his private equity investments.”

I don’t know about that. All I do know is that I want Mitt to run. All he has to do now is persuade Mrs. Romney that the time has arrived once more.

Mitt was a sometimes-entertaining candidate in 2012. I’m ready for his return to the arena.

Do it, Mitt!

 

political news

Palin actually makes sense … more or less

Hell froze over this evening.

It happened the moment I read an online account of an interview that former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin did in which she proclaimed her desire to see a woman “on both sides of the aisle” campaign for the presidency in 2016.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/09/sarah-palin-2016_n_6297570.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

Why did hell freeze over? I actually agree with Palin.

Then she talked some more about the next presidential race and said she gets asked whether she intends to run for the White House in two years.

Would the ex-governor be the Republican who runs, probably against Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Perish the thought. No, blow that thought to smithereens, never to be mentioned or even thought of ever again!

Sarah Barracuda must not run for president. Then again, were she to run, she might be exposed for the intellectual fraud that she’s always been. But the Republican Party is full of serious politicians who are committed to fulfilling their public responsibilities — unlike Palin, who quit halfway through her only term as Alaska governor. Reality TV and Fox News beckoned with big bucks. Moreover, New Mexico has a competent governor in Susana Martinez; Oklahoma is governed by Mary Fallin; newly elected U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa might turn out to be a pleasant surprise.

Palin for president? Good grief, no. A billion times no!

However, I concur with her desire to see women in both major parties suited up for a run for the presidency. It well might be time to cross that important political threshold.

 

national news, political news, State news

Perry to be 'better prepared' next time

So, lame-duck Texas Gov. Rick Perry vows to be “better prepared” to run for president of the United States — if he decides to do so.

My gut tells me he’s made up his mind, just as Hillary Rodham Clinton has made up her mind to run for president in 2016.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2014/09/eyeing-white-house-again-perry-knows-to-be-prepared-this-time/

The only decision left for either of them is when to make the announcement.

We’ll get back to Clinton another day.

I am hopeful Gov. Perry will be prepared for this next run. No more “oops” moments; no more tantrums; no more strange soliloquies that have people asking, “Is this guy drunk, stoned or what?”

If he keeps his wits about him, I am hopeful the national media will probe one important thing about Perry’s interminable time as Texas governor: his governing style.

I’m referring specifically to the way he would mass-veto legislation after the Legislature ended its session. I believe he set some kind of record for vetoes after the 2009 or 2011 sessions. What was most astonishing about the vetoes is that they included legislation that had passed both legislative chambers by unanimous or near-unanimous votes.

With Republicans in Congress upset that the Democrat in the White House is allegedly misusing his executive authority, I’ll be waiting to hear how some GOP lawmakers will react to the knowledge that as governor, Rick Perry has used his own executive authority as governor with more than a touch of zeal.

Then again, Republicans won’t mind that one little bit. Perhaps the Democrats in Congress can raise the issue.

I’ll await the governor’s well-prepared answer.

national news, political news, State news

Mitt falls far short of saying 'no' to 2016 run

Don’t believe Mitt Romney’s non-denial about whether he wants to run for president one more time.

The 2012 Republican presidential nominee told Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace that “I am not running. I have no plans to run.”

OK, Mitt. That ain’t one of those Shermanesque statements, you know, where you’re supposed to say “If nominated I won’t run; if elected, I won’t serve.”

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2014/09/romney-195006.html?hp=r6

Mitt says he’d be a better president than Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democrats’ presumed frontrunner for the 2016 nomination. He also says he’d do better than the man who beat him in ’12, President Barack Obama.

Mitt told Wallace that his time had “come and gone.”

Hey, doggone it, he still hasn’t said he won’t run under any circumstances.

These non-statements about political futures are so frustrating. Politicians keep saying they “have no plans” to do something, then turn around and do what they said they have no plans to do.

The problem with that non-statement is the verb “have.” It’s a present-tense verb that doesn’t rule anything out, say, for tomorrow. Or the next day, or the day after that.

I remember in 1988 I asked the late Sen. Lloyd Bentsen if he would consider running as Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis’s running mate on the Democratic Party presidential ticket. Sen. Bentsen said his plate was full serving as Texas’s senior U.S. senator. He never actually answered directly: yes or no. Turned out he was dodging. Dukakis selected him to run with him for the White House.

Bentsen had an out. He was able to run successfully for re-election to the Senate that year.

Is Mitt Romney really and truly not going to run for president in two years?

I’ve heard nothing from him that says “not just no, but hell no.”