And yes, that picture is the one of Hill kissing Suha Arafat ( "wife" of The Littlest Terrorist ) after Suha had accused the Israelis of poisoning Palestinian children...
Posted on 01/28/2005 12:22:41 AM PST by kattracks
A little immigration reform here, a little religion in the public square there, a little gentle talk about common ground on abortion -- and what have you got? The birth of a new, moderate Hillary Clinton, announces the press."Democratic Party appears to be getting softer on reproductive rights," headlined a National Public Radio story. "Gasps as Hillary woos the anti-abortion vote," reported the London Daily Telegraph. "Hillary Clinton Seen as Staking Out Centrist Positions," announced the Bulletin's Frontrunner.
It's a testament to the rigidity and extremism of the pro-choice abortion movement that even such platitudinous phrases as Clinton tossed into her address to the New York State Family Planning Providers conference were considered signs of movement to the center.
Clinton, in what some hopeful Democrats are describing as her "Sister Souljah" moment (a reference to Bill Clinton's rebuke to a hip-hop star in 1992), told a pro-choice audience that "opposing sides" on the abortion question should "seek common ground" in the effort to prevent unwanted pregnancies. (Oh gosh, she's gone soft!) Clinton further allowed that, "We can all recognize that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."
If anodyne words like those are evidence of a move to the right, consider what that says about the pro-choice position. The pro-choice movement does not want to seek common ground in preventing unplanned pregnancies? It does not recognize that abortion is sad or tragic?
In point of fact, the pro-choice position has hardened over the years to the point where any deviation from orthodoxy is considered heresy. Abortion advocates have fervently resisted every single legislative limit on abortion. They've stoutly opposed waiting periods, parental notification laws and bans on late-term abortions and partial birth abortions. They've even opposed a law that would permit a baby who by accident survives a late-term abortion to be welcomed into life.
Elsewhere in her address, though, Clinton reassured her audience that she remains firmly in the camp of traditional liberals. Following lip service to abstinence programs, Clinton launched into a full-throated cry for (naturally) more federal spending on "comprehensive family planning services." She denounced what she labeled the "global gag rule," by which federal funds are denied for abortion services worldwide.
Still, it would be foolish to laugh off the New Hillary. Political makeovers have succeeded in the past (the New Nixon, the New Wallace), and the Clintons have shown a knack, rare in the Democratic Party, for grabbing symbolic bits of conservatism and weaving them into sheep's clothing. Bill Clinton latched onto curfews and school uniforms to signal a comfortable centrism, and then supplemented this window dressing with a couple of substantive concessions, one on welfare reform and the other on a balanced budget, and thereby ran away with the prize.
Can Hillary do the same? It's not impossible. She can sniff the wind with the best of them. But she has two major hurdles. The first is the Democratic Party, or at least that part of the party that nominates presidential candidates, which is moving steadily to the left even as the country is moving the other way. Hillary cannot campaign as a centrist and hope to win the nomination.
The second hurdle is her life. She has made a career as a liberal do-gooder, rolling up her sleeves to attempt single-handedly to refashion one-seventh of the U.S. economy with Hillarycare. When told that her plan would bankrupt small businesses, she sniffed haughtily that she couldn't be "responsible for every undercapitalized small business in America."
Her proudest moments as a lawyer were those she devoted to working on behalf of the Children's Defense Fund, a super-liberal lobbying group that promoted welfare dependency as a right and fiercely resisted reform. It was Hillary who initially backed Dr. Johnetta Cole, not a "friend of Bill" but a friend of Fidel Castro, for secretary of education. And it was she who coined the phrase "vast, right-wing conspiracy" to describe those who noticed her husband's lies.
She may be moving to the center, but her past will cast a long shadow.
And yes, that picture is the one of Hill kissing Suha Arafat ( "wife" of The Littlest Terrorist ) after Suha had accused the Israelis of poisoning Palestinian children...
NOPE!
Nevertheless, I'll betcha that in less than a year, 2 out of 3 "people on the street" will assure you that Hilly used to be far right but has moved towards the center in the past year. 1/28/2005,,,mark this date down. The MSM will be patting each other on the back big time.
I think Hillary is a sad, and even tragic choice.
She can try it... but we won't buy it.
What's worse is that many FR regulars will fall for it. It looks like we'll have to make available a special section of FR archived material to remind people what is what here.
>>Still, it would be foolish to laugh off the New Hillary. Political makeovers have succeeded in the past (the New Nixon, the New Wallace), and the Clintons have shown a knack, rare in the Democratic Party, for grabbing symbolic bits of conservatism and weaving them into sheep's clothing. <<
Is this a subtle hint by Charen that the Clinton's are really wolves in sheep's clothing?
Who knew? ; >
Right. Like Chirac in France... he was a Communist, or Mussolin, also a Commie until he saw that it wouldn't work and then he became a fascist.
I personally think that it is a case of "Signal right, turn left."
Oh, yeah. The Demonrats get whacked on "Moral Values" and all of a sudden Hitlary starts "Moving To The Center".
Naah, she doesn't have her filthy finger in the wind. She's really abandoned all the perverted leftist goals to which she dedicated her entire life up until the last election.
Yeah, I believe that.
>>Still, it would be foolish to laugh off the New Hillary. Political makeovers have succeeded in the past <<
I'm confused. Are you attributing this comment to me? I didn't make it .. it's taken from the original post.
I don't buy Hillary's "makeover" one bit. The woman is scary and insidious. Probably more dangerous and devious than Bill.
BTW, did you know she's not an advocate of "abstinence"?
(snort)
Hillary is one of the most calculating and ruthless politicians alive. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Limbaugh did his usual incisive analysis of this earlier this week... the question is whether she can keep the screaming left from bolting, by convincing them that she's "just pretending" in order to get elected. That sort of duplicity *is* a time-honored tradition with leftists, y'know... end justifies the means and all that...
She'll end up having to waffle and equivocate even more than Kerry, though - and that alone will prove her undoing if the Republicans manage to run someone as ideologically committed and decisive as GWB against her.
Hitlery's vote against banning partial birth abortion will hurt her badly.
One of the many reasons Joh Kerry lost is because he had no core beliefs, believed in nothing, and went whichever way the wind was blowing. That is a losing position with everyone.
Oh brother, I better shut down the PC today!
That first comment was unclear!
It wasn't directed at you, it just added to your comment.
It was clear to me that you were not and are not a Hillary Supporter!
When I re-read my post, it looks like I thought you were speaking for the dark side!
;-)
See my post 19... that was directed to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.