Hillary Clinton Makes a Stupid 9/11 Comment: Will It Hurt Her Chances in 2008?

OK, so Hillary Clinton made the statement that if another terrorist attack were to happen, that it would HELP the GOP in 2008.  All of the Democrats pounced like hungry cougars onto a helpless rabbit, in response to this, saying it was distasteful and disrespectful, which I agree with – but that’s not the major point.

WHAT IS SHE THINKING HERE?!?!?!?

How would it HELP the Republicans?  True – it helped Bush’s approval rating early on, and even in 2004 – and here’s why – he didn’t know about it/couldn’t affect it.  Now, I know that some disagree, but just stick with me on this – he had only been in Office for months, so he probably didn’t know much about it – so we felt sorry for him.  If it were to happen now, I think we ALL agree that we should have been prepared – and he probably didn’t do a good job at trying to stop it – so how on earth would it help the Republicans?

Done Ranting/Puzzling,

Ranting Republican

8 Responses to “Hillary Clinton Makes a Stupid 9/11 Comment: Will It Hurt Her Chances in 2008?”

  1. j Says:

    …the answer is…

    because the Republicans/Neo-Conservatives used 9/11/fear to force through their agenda and dismissed anyone who disagreed with them as “unpatriotic” – e.g. Max Cleland.

    They or an element within Republicanism have demonstrated their willingness to use the fear card in the past – McCarthyism.

    Democrats having been the victims of the use of “patriotism”/fear imbued charges in the past are more skeptical of them (it might be argued that they are less trusting of authority generally). They are less likely to be won over by an appeal based on “we can save you from the bad guys under your beds” and might rightly see it as an attempt to pull the wool over people’s eyes.

    Bush and the neo-conservatives used the post 9/11 high poll ratings and fear/”patriotism” card to force through an agenda which included tax cuts and a war with Iraq (something Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al had argued/campaigned for, for a considerable time pre-9/11 – they regarded Bush I’s failure to invade Iraq during the Gulf War as a disaster – unsurprisingly Bush I is not a fan of theirs).

    They initially sold the war on WMD (i.e. fear/terror) and alleged links to Al Quaeda…both premises proved to be false, later Blair argued for war based on humanitarian justifications (i.e. Sadam is a nasty guy we ought to take him out). If you go onto you tube and have a search for clips I am sure you will find many which collate the references made by Bush II and the neo-conservatives to 9/11/Al Quaeda and Iraq – which constituted an attempt (a successful one at that…see polls) to generate a link in the minds of US citizens between 9/11 and Sadam. Thus, terror/fear was the main premise for the war – hence, playing the fear card to secure your agenda.

    As it happens the rest of the world – not subjected to the same barrage of commentary designed to link the two events were not fooled…they understood the justification to invade Afghanistan but were not convinced that Iraq was related. 1 million marched in London, massive marches of ordinary people occurred throughout the world. America’s standing was damaged. World leaders who sided with Bush suffered in the polls. Aznar in Spain and Blair in the UK are two casualties of Bush’s poor international standing. Aznar lost the elections in Spain and Blair has now resigned as P.M.

  2. j Says:

    To put my reference to Max Cleland in context (for other readers).

    Max Cleland is a disabled US Army veteran of the Vietnam War and US Senator. He was awarded the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous action in combat. Both of his legs were amputated above the knee and his right forearm due to combat injuries.

    Saxby Chambliss, a Republican ran against Cleland in Georgia for the US Senate in 2002 and won by impugning Cleland’s patriotism and indeed, running ads comparing him to Osama bin Laden.

    Chambliss who got out of military service by claiming a “bum knee” is now a United States Senator, having run a disgraceful campaign against a decorated war veteran who lost three limbs serving his country in Vietnam.

    The fear/”Patriotism” card works…disgusting though it is.

  3. inkslwc Says:

    I wouldn’t call it the fear card – more like hte “protecting your lives card” – but still, it wouldn’t work now – the Republicans had Congress back then, so it just worked smoothly – now nothing he wants passed will pass – so your theory doesn’t even work now.

    The only thing Bush can do without Congress is go into Iran.

  4. j Says:

    “..now nothing he wants passed will pass – so your theory doesn’t even work now”.

    Yes, mercifully the US is a democracy so that kind of pedagogic bullying only works as long as the public (or a significant portion thereof) is fooled by it.

  5. inkslwc Says:

    So my point is, how then, if the Americans see that the “fear tactic” doesn’t work, will it help the GOP in 2008?

    And Max Cleland wasn’t dismissed – he was a keynote speaker at the Democratic Natn’l Convention – that’s pretty important if you ask me.

  6. j Says:

    “So my point is, how then, if the Americans see that the “fear tactic” doesn’t work, will it help the GOP in 2008?”

    It’s a valid point…and I would have to express cautious optimism in agreement to your point. However, if the worst occurs (and I sincerely hope there will be no more attacks)…public opinion has a tendency to swing to the right when attacked. The GOP are on the right and therefore there are more likely to benefit. Would the fear card work…i can only surmise that it might in circumstances of a fresh attack.

    The effectiveness of the fear card has lessened of late in part because of the American peoples weariness of/rejection of it…this is due in part because 9/11 is now a memory (albeit a horrible one) which becomes distant over time to those who were not directly affected by it (i.e. saw it on TV) – namely most voters and US citizens.

  7. j Says:

    agreement “with” apologies – typo

  8. Nick Says:

    “I wouldn’t call it the fear card – more like hte “protecting your lives card””

    Classic.

    –Nick
    http://www.RightMichigan.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: