The Queen stumbles



Yes, I watched the debate up until Kucinich was asked about UFO’s.    And, from what I can tell, the Borg Queen stumbled and was almost knocked off her throne by Edwards and Dodd.  The two questions about giving undocumented immigrants drivers licenses and Bill Clinton requesting that the National Archives not release Hillary’s papers between her office and the President, revealed Hillary to be a dissembler.   Obama and Edwards conspired to attack on the neo-con Iran resolution she voted for and Edwards got the better of the exchange.   

Hillary, although she sounded strong for most of the night, ended up looking like a battered woman because she took several punches to the head from Tim Russert on Social Security and the candidates capable of slowing her coronation.   If her numbers show a significant slide as a result of her one night stumble, I’ll be forced to revise my opinion that the race is not yet over.  What do you think?

27 thoughts on “The Queen stumbles

  1. Straight up lying about the Archive Papers was a No No. Thing is, will they follow up about it.

    The Driver License thing is also a no-brainer. I haven’t yet found anyone that could explain to me why Spitzer has become so focused on it. It’s been tried in other states and EVERY ONE of them have reversed their decision.

  2. dblhelix

    The Driver License thing is also a no-brainer. I haven’t yet found anyone that could explain to me why Spitzer has become so focused on it. It’s been tried in other states and EVERY ONE of them have reversed their decision.

    The starting point is to ask why NY needs a new driver’s license specification — it is in response to REAL-ID, which currently is flying under the radar (and last night’s debate did not help).

    REAL-ID was passed in the senate by 100-0 vote by attaching to an Iraq appropriations bill. It’s bad news, see here.

    The Spitzer plan was negotiated by Bush’s DHS with the goal of implementing REAL-ID compliance nationwide. Now, with respect to undocumented immigrants, specifically, the idea is as follows: if the goal of putting everyone under a system where all of our transactions can be monitored, does it make sense to only do so for those with legal status? The feds specifically tied this into the DL system (normally a state’s issue) to force compliance. So, explain how national security is served by only putting citizens under surveillance? BTW, DHS plans to outsource the implementation to third-party data aggregators.

    Everything that was discussed last night was pure BS. Obama is for it as well, claiming “public safety” (probably her rationale as well). Dodd was just playing some diversionary game by waxing on about the “privilege to drive.” What the govt is doing is implementing a system that was not reviewed or debated by riling folks up with the “illegal immigrant” bogeyman.

    I actually don’t care which candidate experiences fallout from this — if the matter is properly debated in public, it’s a win across the board for Americans. That NY needs a new driver’s license system has nothing to do with illegal immigrants but with REAL-ID implementation. The extension of the driving privilege to the undocumented is to make them documented for national security purposes.

    This is one of my pet issues — I’ve mentioned it here before. I’d like to see REAL-ID repealed and sent back for debate and discussion.

  3. SB,

    You call it racist, and since we are on different sides of the Illegal Alien issue, I’ll leave it at that.


    Oh, I know all about the Real ID, and am completely against it. I even know about the absurdity of outsourcing it. It’s utter lunacy.

  4. dblhelix

    It’s utter lunacy.

    Agree, which is why I’m more than happy to see more attention paid to this “driver’s license” issue — but I expect it to get buried.

  5. That was painful to watch. You know the Borg Queen took major hits when someone like Pat Buchanan says Obama fared better in that debate, despite his recent faux-pas, than the Borg Queen did.

    Buchanan even used the phrase “battered woman” when referring to Hillary, and that wasn’t pretty, either, on “Morning Joe” today.

  6. fafnir

    It’s about time. The “attacks“ on Clinton were about her judgement. That’s fair game. Sure, Obama, Dodd and Edwards don’t have clean hands, but it is Clinton’s responsiblily to point them out.

    Instead of counterpunching, Clinton chose to play rope-a-dope, perhaps hoping to evoke sympathy, and wound up tripping over her mangled response to the question about giving driver licenses to illegal aliens.

    This is not a coronation. Every candidate needs to account for his or her judgement, past performance and stance on the issues.

  7. Jeez, I disagree all the way around. (Except when SB accurately predicted the racist commercials that are being produced as we write.) Hillary isn’t even my candidate but I was surprised at how self-possessed she was even under attack——not only from her opponents but from that redfaced weasel, Tim Russert.

    I think it took courage to defend Eliot Spitzer, the progressive governor of her state, for trying to come up with a remedy for a real problem in NY, given the absence of any national policy or leadership on immigration reform.

    Re: lying about the archives? Jim Warren of the Chicago Tribune pointed out on MSNBC today that there was nothing whatsoever unusual about the Clinton archives issue. And according to Taylor Marsh:
    It is standard for presidents to choose the 12 year maximum to hold the documents. What Russert didn’t bother to add at the time of his document waving drama, was that right after Bill Clinton left the presidency he asked that his documents be released immediately. But after George W. Bush came into office, he decided that presidential papers would be kept secret indefinitely, something Bill Clinton openly fought against, including opposing Bush on the 12 year secrecy procedure, but especially on the new indefinite stand.

    Anyway, there’s a lot to criticize Hillary about, but if you’re going to criticize any candidate, it packs more of a punch if you keep in mind the facts. And bringing in comments from Pat Buchanan is really reaching. Who gives a fuck what Pat Buchanan thinks?

    The last observation about the debate: Obama looked tired and off his game. He gets no points for openly using Republican talking points and even an old Republican attack on John Kerry verbatim, “she was for it, before she was against it…” That won’t endear him to me any time soon. But he does get points for his answer to the idiotic Russert on life on other planets. Edwards looked desperate in his constant assault on Hillary, although apparently that won him points in some quarters. I’d like to hear something substantial from Obama and I wish Edwards would bring up his own ideas and agenda. What the Democrats need is strong, credible, and electable voices coming from the left. And even if Hillary does turn out to be the nominee, she’ll have to do so by playing to the left rather than the right. I can’t remember the last time anyone pandered to me.

  8. My thoughts on the Bounty Hunter – after I heard the clip this morning on local talk radio:

    What does it take for White folk to admit that other White folk are racist?

    I’m glad that MY determination of what’s racist and what’s not doesn’t depend upon White folk, cause they’d never get there.

  9. FYI: TBQ’s Camp is now playing the ‘ Poor White Woman’ Card with Hillary. How DARE they gang up on ‘ Poor Hillary’.

    I remember a debate with Obama where they all ganged up on him….did anyone supporting him come out with ‘they’re ganging up on The Brother?’

    See, I can’t stand this 3-6-9.

    Black folk can’t support Obama because he’s Black..

    But, women are supposed to support ‘ Poor Hillary’ because they ‘all ganged up on the defenseless woman’.


  10. Denise

    Any thoughts on this Bounty Hunter who hates Black people?

    Since Red Rabbit already threw it out there: Who gives a fuck what Dog the Bounty Hunter (or his “original funk box” wife) thinks!


  11. Ogre Mage

    What played out in this debate was bound to happen eventually. Clinton had consolidated too large a lead in the polls and with the sand running through the primary hourglass, the Democratic field decided she HAD to be taken down a notch. Mission accomplished. Camp Clinton tried to intimate the “piling on” was due to sexism. Not true. They “piled on” because she was the frontrunner. The same happened to Howard Dean last time and he collapsed. I do not see Clinton suffering that fate. The BQ is tougher and shrewder and has the resources to counter when the news cycle isn’t going her way. I would point to the convenient timing of the AFSCME endorsement soon after.

    The media decided to join in on the hit on Clinton. Maybe they want to cover a real race and are afraid she is running away with it. Maybe Russert just feels limp because Hillary talked all over him the last time around. But their bias against her this time was obvious.

    Edwards was the strongest critic of Clinton in this debate and while he was successful in exploiting her vulnerabilities, he will pay a price. Most of the attacks against Clinton were on the issues and some were effective. But Edwards was leaning dangerously close to attacking her character. The Hillary Haters will love it but to my mind Edwards looks very desperate. He succeeded in driving up Hillary’s negatives but he will drive up his own even higher.

    The real beneficiary of this may be Obama, whose goal seemed to be to criticize Clinton just enough so he could say that he did and do no more than absolutely necessary. He won’t be getting additional support based on this debate but if both Hillary and Edwards are hurt, he benefits.

    The next two months will be a challenge for the Borg Queen. Opponents on both sides see her as the clear frontrunner and she will be besieged from all directions. Edwards and Obama have found a chink in Hillary’s armor — her evasiveness — and they will try to crack it open. But Hillary has been under fire before and she knows how to adapt. I am still betting she gets the nomination.

  12. Michael

    Agree, who cares what Dog thinks. He’s entitled to think and say anything he wants, no matter how stupid and we have the right to be offended or NOT. But nobody has the right, under the law to not be offended. I’m worn completely out at the thought police and race hustlers. Who assigned Dog any credibility, he doesn’t represent whites any more than that foot-in-mouth Kanye West represents American blacks. And on that note, who gave Al credibility in being the one to grant absolution on anyone? I wish we’d secretly record what Al Sharpton says about whites and jews in private, you know thats right around the corner. Point is niether Dog nor Al should register on our scale of people we give a sh&^ about or that we think has any credibility. Lets move on.

  13. Off Hillary topic, but I’m YET AGAIN, deeply disappointed in my senator, Dianne Feinstein…ARGH! She went along with the BS resolution against MoveOn for their Petraeus “General Betrayus” ad, now she’s caving in and voting for another of Bush’s torture emissaries (sorry, if you won’t answer the questions, then that says it all!), Mukasey? ARGH to the nth degree! What happened to the days of being SOOOOOO proud of having two strong, intelligent, female senators from my beloved state of California? Don’t go letting me down, Ms. Boxer, ’cause I don’t think I don’t think my sould could stand much more disappointment.

  14. Yikes, sorry about the last sentence (feel free to correct, SB. :)) Should read: Don’t go letting me down, Ms. Boxer, ’cause I don’t think my soul could stand much more disappointment. (Guess I’m so disappointed I just had to say it twice. ;))

  15. Anyone have any conspiracy theories about the French folk and those African children from Sudan/Chad? Since there is no big market for African Orphans, and I’m not buying altruism in any way, shape or form, there’s something nefarious going on. Anyone put on their tinfoil hats? P6’s came up with them being drug company guinea pigs.

  16. Rikyrah:

    I think I just saw the fourth horse of the Apocalypse: (Trudi JulieAnnie getting endorsed by the “Christian” who made that 700 Club Fortune by raping those diamond mines in South Africa, and advocating the assassination of world leaders who don’t agree with Bush in Jesus’ name).

Comments are closed.