The Clinton Double-Edged Sword

You know, I'm glad Hillary Clinton is going on the offensive and taking a look at Barack Obama's somewhat outsized claims.

Clinton then led the crowd through a series of chants about what is “not change.” When you support legislation that bans lawmakers from accepting meals from lobbyists when they are sitting down, but permits meals when they are standing up, Clinton said, “That’s not change.” When you say you’re against oil companies and then you vote for Dick Cheney’s energy bill….that’s not change.”

Because now it's fair game to look at Hillary's claims of "creating change for 35 years" and all of the great things that happened in her husband's presidency (like losing the House and Senate, ushering in Republican government, the Telecommunications Act, NAFTA, don't ask don't tell...), voting for the Iraq war and Kyl-Lieberman, sponsoring bullshit bills on violent video games and flag burning, etc.

You know, candidates stretch the truth, and they put their positions in the best light. Hillary's leaving a LOT out of her critique of Obama, and I'm probably leaving a lot out of my critique of Hillary. But let's gets the facts of the public record out in the open. When you do, I think you'll find that all three leading candidates have records that are at times moderate and at times liberal. What's more interesting to me is where you go from here, and how you lead. Hillary can call Obama all talk and no action; it's a critique we've been making on the blogs for a couple years. But then she has to defend those parts of her own record that she hasn't shown much of an interest in lately.

Hillary's supporters are nervous as hell and they should be. Every argument they make has the potential to rebound back on them. Meanwhile Obama reaches voters that were previously not reachable, through building a new coalition.