Posted on 02/13/2002 5:34:59 AM PST by Mia T
EW YORK, Dec 21--Diehard clinton lackey, Lanny Davis tested the CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme in what the clintons likely regard their most difficult venue, "The O'Reilly Factor." The top-rated Fox News show demonstrated once again that its motto, "the no spin zone," is no spin. The eponymous host swiftly stopped the spin (and the spin). O'Reilly debunked all the shameless clinton-directed revisionism spewed by Davis, exposing the absurdity of the CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme even as he underscored clinton's immutable legacy of depravity and failure. EW YORK, Jan.4--Second-string clinton lapdog, Ann Lewis, failed in her attempt to implement the CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme on "Hannity & Colmes" tonight. The team's implementation score, thus far, is 352 failed attempts and zero successes, despite the best aiding-and-abetting efforts of The New York Times, the Washington Post and Helen Thomas. Rather than disproving the motivating premise of the Harlem-hatched mission -- a clinton legacy of depravity, ineptitude and failure -- Lewis' tired shtick only served to underscore the premise's essential truth. Oliver (Ollie) North, a combat-decorated Marine and host of the Fox News show, "War Stories," was substituting for Sean Hannity. Ollie delivered the coup de grâce: "Reagan didn't need to remind the people about his legacy... The people already made up their mind about clinton." Said another way, the very existence of the CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme is confirmation that clinton was--and is--an utter failure. 01-08-02 James Galbraith depreciates clinton economic policy Says clinto-nomics was unsustainable, created unrealistic expectations "We are seeing its end right now" ASHINGTON, Jan. 8-- James Galbraith, a Keynesian like his famous father, John Kenneth, a self-professed lifelong Democrat and a professor of economics at the LBJ School of Public Policy at the University of Texas, proclaimed on Washington Journal (C-SPAN) today that clinton economic policy "would not sustain growth and prosperity undefinitely...we are seeing its end right now." Professor Galbraith explained that the clinton scheme "depended on the private sector willing to borrow and spend." He added that the clinton period "created the unrealistic expectation" that the debt could be reduced to zero in 13 years. If we take Galbraith's comments to their logical conclusion, then, oxymoronically, the "it's the economy, stupid" clinton scheme will be remembered for engineering not a weak economy but a weak presidency. History will record that clinton economic policy decisions, like all clinton policy decisions, were short-range and egocentric, that is, were based solely on their projected immediate effect on bill and/or hillary clinton. The "it's the economy, stupid" clinton scheme was engineered specifically to render an unqualified candidate viable, a depraved president tolerable, a president's successor feckless, and, finally, an ex-president (or his wife) craved.
Red Dragon Rising: China's Space Program Driven by Military Ambitions
|
Nine Democratic presidential candidates battled tonight over the war in Iraq and over how to provide health care insurance for all Americans, in a debate that highlighted deep fissures in the party that several candidates warned could endanger its chances of winning back the White House. It was the first time these candidates have met in debate, and it almost instantly turned into a squabble that revealed strong -- and in one case apparently personal -- differences in this crowded field, on national security and domestic policy. Democrats' First Presidential Debate Shows Party Fissures |
hyperlinked images of shame |
|
by Mia T, 4.6.03 Mia T, THE ALIENS Al From is sounding the alarm. "Unless we convince Americans that Democrats are strong on national security," he warns his party, "Democrats will continue to lose elections." Helloooo? That the Democrats have to be spoon-fed what should be axiomatic post-9/11 is, in and of itself, incontrovertible proof that From's advice is insufficient to solve their problem. From's failure to fully lay out the nature of the Democrats' problem is not surprising: he is the guy who helped seal his party's fate. It was his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that institutionalized the proximate cause of the problem, clintonism, and legitimized its two eponymic provincial operators on the national stage. The "Third Way" and "triangulation" don't come from the same Latin root for no reason. That "convince" is From's operative word underscores the Democrats' dilemma. Nine-eleven was transformative. It is no longer sufficient merely to convince. One must demonstrate, demonstrate convincingly, if you will
which means both in real time and historically. When it comes to national security, Americans will no longer take any chances. Turning the turn of phrase back on itself, the era of the Placebo President is over. (Incidentally, the oft-quote out-of-context sentence fragment alluded to here transformed meaningless clinton triangulation into a meaningful if deceptive soundbite.) Although From is loath to admit it -- the terror in his eyes belies his facile solution -- the Democratic party's problem transcends its anti-war contingent. With a philosophy that relinquishes our national sovereignty -- and relinquishes it reflexively
and to the UN no less -- the Democratic party is, by definition, the party of national insecurity. With policy ruled by pathologic self-interest -- witness the "Lieberman Paradigm," Kerry's "regime change" bon mot (gone bad), Edwards' and the clintons' brazen echoes thereof (or, alternatively, Pelosi's less strident wartime non-putdown putdown)
and, of course, the clincher -- eight years of the clintons' infantilism, grotesquerie and utter failure -- the Democratic party is, historically and in real time, the party of national insecurity. The Democrats used to be able to wallpaper their national insecurity with dollars and demogoguery. But that was before 9/11. |
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.