Tim Russert Rapes Mrs. Bill Clinton. Just Like Rick Lazio.
Hillary Clinton's Victorian Era Campaign
By Erick Posted in 2008 | Debate | Hillary Clinton | Tim Russert — Comments (33) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Damn Tim Russert. He actually asked tough questions of Hillary Clinton in the debate Monday night. And now, Hillary's campaign is on the attack.
This is all part of Hillary's Victorian Campaign Strategy. You know the one. She is to be seen and heard, but not "listened to." You are to presume that she is a dainty, delightful creature with pleasant opinions acceptable enough to be welcomed into polite society, but never you ask her tough policy questions, that would be cruel, offensive, and impolite.
And so Hillary Clinton seeks to have it both ways. A strategy we all knew was coming because of what happened to Rick Lazio when he ran against Clinton for the U.S. Senate in 2000. Lazio walked across the stage, dared to one up Mrs. Bill Clinton, and the media had a field day. Hillary Attacked! read the headline. "How *dare* Rick Lazio do that. She's a woman! This is mental, verbal rape! *And* it's the FIRST lady!", the left wing pundits in the New York Times sneered.
And now Tim Russert has done it too. Save for a few guys at National Review the other night, most analysts have lambasted Hillary Clinton's performance Monday night. The result is predictable.
Tim Russert roughed up a girl, is the spin. He dared to ask the front runner who leads by a wide margin tough questions. And she's a girl. That's unfair.
Doesn't Tim Russert know that he's not allowed to ask a girl tough questions even when she wants to play with the boys? That's not to say he can't ask the boy's tough questions. He can. Equality is a one way street to the Clintons. But how dare he allow Mrs. Bill Clinton to answer one question, drivers licenses for illegal aliens, two different ways.
That, sadly, amounted to rape. Or at least you'd think so, given the outrage Mrs. Bill Clinton's campaign and supporters are expressing.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | In Which Republicans Learn Something Valuable — Comments (10) »
Tim Russert Rapes Mrs. Bill Clinton. Just Like Rick Lazio. 33 Comments (0 topical, 33 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Chris Wallace was pretty tough on the repubs in the last debate, but none of them are crying to the press about it. Russert was equally tough on the males. This is all a calculated misdirection from the real issue: she's incapable of giving straight, forthright answers on any issue.
...why she campaigns the way she does, and don't disapprove.
And I also think I should get a piece of whatever over/under you got on my comment.
"The caller addded that Clinton’s response to questions about records from her time in the White House that have been sealed by the National Archives “made me roll my eyes.'"
She said in one resonse that her time "on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue" were one of her qualifications for President. It will be interesting to see how long her competitors let her get away with "the records are sealed" evasion - again, cheerfully having it both ways.
One reason I am leaning slightly toward Rudy is that he is one person who would not be afraid to take her down. If he can stare down the Mob, he can handle Clinton Inc.
I think Fred is quite capable of verbally letting her have it.
Oz
Read my most recent story, "Why I'm with Fred" on First Cut Politics
First, I think a substantial amount of commentators said that she had, at worst, a lukewarm performance, such as The Fix. A handful of articles "lambasting" her, however, are getting all the publicity. Admittedly, more articles than usual criticized her than in the past, but that's hardly enough to make it "most analysts."
Second, I don't think Clinton is criticizing tough questions; she's criticizing tough questions to her, soft questions to others. Looking back, the other candidates got questions about things like whether life exists in outer space.
Looking at the NYT's Debate Analyzer, she was asked to address Edwards's charge of "double talk." She was asked a misleading question about the Iran amendment. She gave an answer about Iraq, then Obama was given the T-ball of whether her answer was consistent with what she said in the past. She was read a long screed by Giuliani and given a chance to respond. She was asked about the national archives ban her husband had in place. She was asked about a comment "overheard by" a reporter regarding Social Security. Etc. These questions went on all night.
No question the debate took a few jabs at others (e.g., asking Obama why he changed his mind on Social Security). But the overwhelming thrust of the moderators' questions was to criticize her, force her to defend herself, ask loaded questions, and ask her rivals questions designed to attack her. If it were simply a "tough question" debate, I'd probably agree with your analysis, Erick. But this debate went a step beyond "tough questions" to "an imbalance of tough questions directed at a single candidate." That's not the way to run a debate.
I don't think Clinton is criticizing tough questions; she's criticizing tough questions to her, soft questions to others.
Too bad, Queeny. Life's a b***h when you're at the top. As the front-runner, she's gonna hit a lot tougher going than the guys who are trailing. She's gonna have to suck it up and act a little Presidential, instead of whining about poor pitiful her.
“I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels” - John Calvin
She's the front runner of your party's presidential primary. Don't you think she should be able to answer a couple of supposedly "tough" questions.
Do you support NY giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens? Doesn't really seem like a "tough" question and all she gave was a long winded non-answer.
You call Obama's question a T-ball. I'd say most all the questions asked of Democrats range on a scale from T-Ball to softball.
And a specific dispute on your posting, you say she was asked a missleading question about Iran. The question was asked to Obama and her misleading question was "Same question to you Mrs. Clinton. What would be your red line?"
Hillary would be a disaster for our country and this debate only begins to show a little of why....
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
But thanks for name-calling otu of the gate.
On Iran, he mischaracterized the amendment by treating it as an AUMF rather than an acknowledgement of the present diplomatic position of the US. His follow-up to Obama is "same question" in name only, because he asks about the "red line." (Obama didn't vote on the Amendment.)
No question that she needed to answer the tough questions, and the NY driver's license was a legitimate and difficult question that she should have answered. But I do agree that she received noticeably disproportionately more difficult questions than anyone else.
(1) "name-calling otu of the gate"? No, that wasn't "name-calling," and if you can't handle a simple question like that, then you have three options: grow a thicker skin, shut up, or go the heck away.
(2) Your argument is almost word for word what the Hillary supporters in the Hill article Erick linked said. So, either you are one, or you sound exactly like one. Either way, refer back to #1.
...like "Let me guess, a Hillary supporter, right?" is so uncivil.
Seriously -- grow a thicker skin, or whine somewhere else that somebody actually responds to you.
Wow. Just wow.
Nobody even hauled out the IdiotSticks™. Based on your complaints, how in the world will Hillary handle the press if she gets elected. Suppose they treat her like they've treated GWB. Obviously, she's not qualified for office.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
But glad to see being a Hillary supporter is an insult.
I don't think the driver's license question was tough. She just got a poor response to her non-answer.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
The one I saw was a "Mrs. Clinton, same question." that Obama fielded first.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
"she's criticizing tough questions to her, soft questions to others"
I don't think that's true. From the article Erick linked:
"We're not challenging the media on that, but the sentiment you've expressed is obviously one I've heard," Penn said.
It's not about complaining. It's about turning outrage into money.
You'll also never hear Clinton's campaign make the "she's a woman" claim that Erick implies. If the media does it, that's their choice, but it would be a bad, bad campaign move. You'll notice that Erick doesn't provide any examples of the "she's a girl" spin in his post.
Clinton didn't do particularly well. She could have answered driver's license thing much better. "I don't like having to do this sort of thing, but I support Spitzer for making the best of a bad federal immigration situation" would have been fine. Answering the flip-flop accusation with, "I don't like it but it's the best we've got. Is that too nuanced for you to understand?" would have been fine.
The archive thing was a mess. If she's going to say it's relevant experience, then she's going to have trouble defending the idea that it's not important for people to see it now. There's no good answer for her. Everyone knows that that much information plus the media plus the blogosphere plus a fine-toothed comb equal disaster for *any* candidate. But that's life, and she has to deal with it.
- You'll also never hear Clinton's campaign make the "she's a woman" claim that Erick implies.
I don't agree.
Those female voters are saying, “Sen. Clinton needs our support now more than ever if we’re going to see this six-on-one to try to bring her down,” Penn told those on the campaign call.
Penn is "Clinton’s senior strategist and pollster," which certainly qualifies him to speak for the campaign. To specifically refer to female voters sympathizing with PoorLittleHillary™ for a six-on-one attack is exactly the sort of "Don't hit me, I'm a girl" hoo-hah that Erick criticized.
My hunch is that this is very short-sighted strategy on Clinton's part. "Don't hit me I'm a girl" works for First Ladies and maybe even for Senate candidates, but a would-be Commander in Chief whose job will be to protect the US from foreign aggression needs a very different act. That's especially true when the most likely foreign aggressors hit girls as part of their religion.
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.
...if he thinks there's a difference in campaign strategy between saying "Men are ganging up on a woman" and saying "Female voters are going to react to this". He knows this stuff.
The reason Erick even wrote this piece is that you have to *work* to frame it as female "whining". Clinton's campaign is being very precise with this. The boxing gloves and the quote ("Six guys against Hillary. I'd call that a fair fight. This is one strong woman") are precision-crafted not to sound whiny. They emphasize her strength in just the right way. And it's coming from others, not her directly.
Will it backfire, or cross the line into sounding whiny? My guess is no. My guess is that female voters *will* sympathize.
Let us agree to disagree. I believe that female voters who support Hillary will sympathize with her. I think female voters who don't like her will not be swayed by either her "strength" or her feigned "victimhood." The reasons they don't like her have nothing to do with any of that.
Moving now to the fact that there is another half of the population, I think most men — even Hillary supporters — are wary of that sort of manipulation from someone who aspires to power. I don't know that it will cost her many votes, but for sure it won't win her any.
I think what really jumps off the page is the speed with which her campaign tried to use the incident as an excuse to ask for more money. If there is one thing about Hillary that is starting to smell funny, it's the overkill regarding fundraising.
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.
Some will see it as strength, some will see it as feigned victimhood. Some will possibly require Erick's kind assistance.
As to fundraising overkill, I think the outrage=>money alchemy has been used by Democrats far more often up to this point (Edwards "Coulter Cash" is a good example, as well as... well, everything moveon.org does). It's not a tactic that fits well for Republicans when it's framed as an empathetic reaction to an "attack" -- but it works well for Republicans when it's framed as "our way of life is under assault". So there will probably be overkill on both sides.
But I agree with you on the general point. Obama's starting to smell funny in the same way.
She wants her records revealed at the same pace as all other former first ladies.
She isn't just a former first lady. She is running for freakin President on her past "unique qualification"!
What a putz. She makes my stomach turn.
Her economic advisor was on CNBC this morning and asked about her claim that she will "take oil company profits and invest them in renewable". He had to try to spin what she said and would not take a position after being asked repeatedly. Notice the dem spinners always start out with "What he/she really was saying is...."
Ask not what I can do for my country, ask what my country can do for me. Washington Elected Elite
Will Bill have the codes ? Will Bill out rank the VP ? Is it legal for Bill to have a 3rd term?A man can not attack a woman .Ann Romney's comparison piece the day of the debates comparing first lady to first lady would slay Hillary.A vote for Rudy is a vote for Hillary .Rudy is dead with the PROLIFERS with only one percent of their vote . Also Rudy does not have a FIRST LADY or family.Hillary or Rudy ,it does not matter:proabortion ,progay ,antigun ,antifamily,and they are on the wrong side of the fence.................WAKE UP AND SMELL THE POSTUM........." Evangelicals for Mitt " .web
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
No one knew that was a sin until the media told them so, then it became an outrage. However when spaceman Al Gore did the same to Bush it became un-outrageous. Funny how similar actions are bad or not depending on what party you belong to.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
Is anybody really suprised to learn that when push comes to shove,Rodham will hide behind her vagina?...I hope the little twinkies on her staff pull this crap again and again
Think about it - Hillary gets all worked up and completely flustered if some reporter strays from the carefully tailored talking points she expects him to follow. What the hell does she expect to get from Iran, China, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, etc.? Does she think she'll get to pre-approve statements that Ahmadinejad is going to make? The President - especially as C in C - needs to plan for and react to whatever cards he/she is dealt, not whine that the cards they got are unfair.
The GOP could really strike a chord with independents over this, as it absolutely highlights what fence-sitters fear about her.
doesn't need to answer your questions or any others. She's ENTITLED to be POTUS. Just ask her.
--------------------
Vista really sucks!
Was the concept of rape invoked by any of the left-wing sources you're citing? Or did you bring that in yourself?
The Spin Control Panel activates it whenever an unexpected drop in Campaign Speed is detected.
Upon command from the driver, James Bond-like gizmos begin shooting estrogen pellets at the pursuing press!