|
Bloviating Frank Rich joined
lefty bloviators who've turned against the
Clintons. He makes no secret about why/ No, not because
she's a liar, a dissembler, a perjurer, a crook and a - did I say
liar? No, that's never bothered Rich in the past. What
bothers him today is, evidently, the pack leaders he decided those things might matter to decent people who aren't foaming-dog democrats.
| “ | Absent
from this debate is any sober recognition that a Hillary Clinton
nomination, if it happens, will send the Democrats into the general
election with a new and huge peril that may well dwarf the current wars
over race, gender and who said what about Ronald Reagan.
What has gone unspoken is this: Up until this moment, Hillary has
successfully deflected rough questions about Bill by saying, “I’m
running on my own” or, as she snapped at Barack Obama in the last
debate, “Well, I’m here; he’s not.” This sleight of hand became
officially inoperative once her husband became a co-candidate, even to
the point of taking over entirely when she vacated South Carolina last
week. With “two for the price of one” back as the unabashed modus
operandi, both Clintons are in play.
For the Republicans, that means not just a double dose of the one
steroid, Clinton hatred, that might yet restore their party’s unity but
also two fat targets. Mrs. Clinton repeatedly talks of how she’s been
“vetted” and that “there are no surprises” left to be mined by her
opponents. On the “Today” show Friday, she joked that the Republican
attacks “are just so old.” So far. Now that Mr. Clinton is ubiquitous,
not only is his past back on the table but his post-presidency must be
vetted as well. To get a taste of what surprises may be in store, you
need merely revisit the Bill Clinton questions that Hillary Clinton has
avoided to date. [The Billary Road to Republican Victory]
| ” |
Here he was last Sunday. Preaching that "the
Romney victory in Michigan is another reminder of how Republicans
aren’t even playing in the same multiracial American sandbox." Running on empty. Yawn.
| “ |
Ronald Reagan Is Still Dead
The New York Times ^
| January 20, 2008 | Frank Rich
CONTEMPLATING the Clinton-Obama racial war, some Republicans
were so excited you’d have thought Ronald Reagan had risen from the
dead to slap around a welfare deadbeat.
Never mind that the
G.O.P. is running on empty, with no ideas beyond the incessant
repetition of Reagan’s name. A battle over race-and-gender identity
politics among the Democrats, with its acrid scent from the 1960s,
might be just the spark for a Republican comeback. (As long as the
G.O.P.’s own identity politics, over religion, don’t flare up.)
Alas,
these hopes faded on Tuesday night. First, the debating Democrats
declared a truce, however fragile, in their racial brawl. Then
Republicans in Michigan reconstituted their party’s election-year chaos
by temporarily revivifying yet another candidate, Mitt Romney, who had
been left for dead.
The playing of the race card by Hillary
Clinton’s surrogates to diminish Barack Obama was sinister. But the
Clintons are hardly bigots, and the Democratic candidates all have a
history of fighting strenuously for inclusiveness. By contrast, the
Romney victory in Michigan is another reminder of how Republicans
aren’t even playing in the same multiracial American sandbox. ... blah-blah-blah
| ” |
Let's hear it for Frankie!
| Gimme an A |
| Gimme an S |
| Gimme another S |
| Gimme an H |
| Gimme an O |
| Gimme an L |
| Gimme an E |
Whadda you got"
Frank Rich!
|
