WTF does Hillary stand for?

If you visit John Edwards's website, there's a nice, prominent tab labeled "Issues," where a few of the biggest issues are discussed.

Go to Barack Obama's website, and "Issues" brings you a bigger variety of our current concerns.

At Dennis Kucinich's website, "Issues" is right there handy, and you get a mission statement, plus Dennis's top ten.

There are also "Issues" links for Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Bill Richardson, Wes Clark, Joe Biden, and ten minor candidates. (The Rev. Al Sharpton has not announced, and has no candidate site yet.)

Each of the other candidates' websites have an "Issues" link, but if you want to know where Hillary stands on the issues, good luck.

Visit Hillary Clinton's website, and hmmmmmm, where are the "Issues"? Oh! Maybe over here, under "Hillary" . . . uh, nope, here we have "Hillary's Story," "Growing Up," "Mother & Advocate" — nothing on the issues here — "First Lady," and "US Senator" — here's a bit about what she's done in the Senate, but nothing on the important issues facing the next president. It's all warm and fuzzy, very fuzzy.

Here's a tab that says "Take Action" and leads to "Join Team Hillary." A tab for "Newsroom" press releases, where if I have time, I can feel even warmer and fuzzier. The tab on the far right says "Contribute." If I get on her email list I can "Make History."

As far as I can see from her website, Hillary wants me to intuit that she'll make a great president. She wants me to send her money and vote for her because (1) she makes me feel warm and fuzzy; (2) she'll be the first woman president; (3) she's Bill's wife (and he will be first First Gentleman); (4) she's Chelsea's mom; (5) she was "the first-ever student commencement speaker" at Wellesley; (6) she's a Senator; and (7) she's tough enough to not apologize for being wrong.

Warm, fuzzy,and slippery. Tell me something that fits my vision of America's future.

Cross-posting with poll at Daily Kos.

Comments

I am hopeful that HC doesn't get the nomination

it would bring out the voters for sure, but probably to defeat her.

No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.

Progressive Discussions

Oh, you don't know...

Hazy
Illogical
Lawyeristic
Legalities
Are
Really
Yummy

or something like that

Now why would you assume that?

n/t

No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.

Progressive Discussions

She doesn't stand for a damn thing

And her website is a tacit acknowledgement of such!

Her politics are bad for the Democratic party, as she learned from the master, her husband. Bill Clinton had all the tools to become a great president, but he was only a good one because he, too, stood for nothing. He left no kind of lasting liberal legacy, a la Kennedy, Roosevelt, and Johnson, even. Instead, he opted to tack left, tack right---almost a dance to keep people confused and guessing, not knowing where to hit him.

And she's the same way. She was the last person in the party to join the anti-war movement (I'm leaving Lieberman out, because he's red anyway), but she is so brazen to act like she invented skepticism.

While some might call them pragmatists, they are only pragmatic about two things---obtaining and retaining power.

War is over if you want it.

Strong criticism, and even if you throw in . . .

. . . the good things Bill accomplished, and his historic budget surpluses, he wasn't progressive enough, dammit!

To Be Fair

Really, it's only fair to compare her to Gov. Richardson, as neither of them are officially candidates for the Presidency, yet. Hillary's still, technically, in the exploratory phase.

During the exploratory phase of his campaign, Sen. Obama's page was equally sparse, if not less so.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. - Robert F. Kennedy

----
There are people in every time and every land who want to stop history in its tracks. They fear the future, mistrust the present, and invoke the security of the comfortable past which, in fact, never existed. - Robert F. Kennedy

Maybe she's "exploring" what face she . . .

. . . should show to appeal to the broadest base of support. That would not surprise me. During her stint in the Senate she's been pretty right of center, and lately she's been trying to appear more left.

Wes Clark hasn't announced either, but . . .

. . . he's got an "Issues" link on his "exploratory" site. At DKos, somebody pointed out to me that Hillary's website could be deliberately vague on the issues. Maybe she is depending on media image and sound bites to carry her. The latest Hillary story I saw has her making a massive appeal to women for support so together we can shatter one of the remaining "glass ceilings," and have a woman president. It's kind of scary to wonder whether that single issue could actually do it for her.

I think someone

Needs to tell Sen. Edwards that he either needs to take down his one corps link or remove some of the items from it.

I am not an Edwards follower, dont know to much about him, so went to his web page to see what gives.

Saw the link to one corps, Checked it out.

My area, Elizibeth City, Hertford chapter, AHHHH, good! 3 members between the two. Ok, they small, just getting started, noticed the canned food drive. zero cans for both groups. ummmm, not good, but then again, they may not have been organized for this.

Looked at the oldest and biggest chapters. one had 178 memebers, other had 45 members,36 cans each collected? HUMMMMM, is the grass roots supporting him? Is the grass roots supporting this canned collection cause? Is this a valid thing to even worry about?

My position is still out on Mr. Edwards. I think he really needs to validate those numbers, allowing these kind of numbers to be attached to him from his website could hurt him?

Just a word to the wise.