The pressure in the Democratic Presidential race is definitely moving up. And it’s hitting Senator Clinton right between the eyes.

Over the weekend, Senator Clinton seemed to get quite upset when, while discussing healthcare, John Edwards mentioned that he and Senator Obama are agents of change and that Senator Clinton was not. Her response was that

“there are 7,000 kids in New Hampshire that have healthcare because I helped to create the children’s health insurance program.”

Now I’m not sure how many people watched Fox News on Sunday when Dick Morris, who used to work for President Bill Clinton, refuted her comment. According to his live comments, Senator Clinton had nothing to do with what she claimed. He stated that it was in fact his efforts and discussions with President Bill Clinton that helped the kids in New Hampshire. Mr. Morris further stated that at the time, First Lady Clinton was overseas and had no involvement in the matter.

It’s a strong accusation, and I have seen nothing that refutes or even acknowledges his comments. If it is accurate, then it is another case of Senator Clinton taking credit for the work of her husband as her own experience. It would be an example of desperation, as is her anger, as her hopes for the Presidency crumbles.

And then on Monday we see this



I believe this is a bad sign. Given that the Presidential race is stressful, and that losing in Iowa was a huge blow to her campaign. But the reality is what happens when U.S. military forces are killed overseas, while the economy is crashing, diplomatic efforts with North Korea are failing, oil prices are through the roof, and a tornado has just decimated a big city in the mid-west? Which sounds more stressful?

And if this emotional moment is not real, which I am not assuming, it is a blatant attempt to cash in on being a woman in the worst way.

Looking at it in several different ways, the outlook is not good for the “presumed nominee” (as claimed in polispeak by multiple pundits for most of 2007) of the Democratic party.

Labels: Democratic Party, Dick Morris, election 2008, John Edwards, New Hampshire, Polispeak, Presidential race, Senator Clinton

Here is an interesting bit in defense of Senator Clinton and denouncing the Republican Party. It seems quite interesting that this piece focuses on the election in France, cable news and a newspaper in London. Obviously the election of the next President of the United States affects the entire world, but the way this one blogger puts it you would think the world is hoping for a Democrat in the position.

To say that a Democratic President in 2008 would be a bad thing is a bit early to call. We don’t even know who will be the candidate of that party. The same must be said of the Republican candidates. But there are a few things we can definitely say.

The election of the President of France did have a large voter turnout. They do have a different style of politics, but one of the factors in their election was a pro-America (and that means President Bush) candidate. The anti-American candidate lost by an overwhelming number.

Add to this the fact that the candidates debate issues and you get a very different kind of race than what we have here. Liquor ads are banned on American TV, and we do discuss the past of our candidates. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.

“Conservative groups and political figures are planning a film, books and a concerted media campaign to demonise Clinton, who is already one of the most polarising figures in American politics.”

I don’t know if demonize is the correct word here. There have been several books discussing Senator Clinton. They are bringing up her actions in Whitewater and motivations for getting elected in NY State. These are real concerns, and as a long-time political figure she knew they would be raised. There is even added interest as one of her former aides, Mr. Dick Morris, has raised concerns about her. I for one have to wonder why would someone who was instrumental to helping her husband get elected is one of those leading the charge to prevent her from getting elected President. That’s not negative.

As for the internet, to say that Republicans are using it against any Democratic candidate implies that the Democrats are not doing the same thing. I can point to at least a dozen unsolicited emails from Mr. John Edwards to prove that. [I mentioned previously that rather than answering a letter with question, Mr. Edwards has added me to his mass mailing list and has not made any other response.] Many of his mass mailings directly attack the position of the President and the Republican Party. I’m sure other candidates have done the same thing, including Senator Clinton. That sounds like a similar and equal use of the Internet to me.

One of the most interesting media campaigns against Senator Clinton was made by a fellow Democrat. While Senator Obama’s campaign denied involvement, it was found that they were responsible for the very popular remake of the old television commercial that spread on YouTube. They implied that Senator Clinton was the Orwellian equivalent of Big Brother. Republicans can’t be blamed for that.

Continued in Part 2...

Labels: Dick Morris, John Edwards, presidential candidate, Senator Barak Obama, Senator Hillary Clinton