Tuesday, February 28, 2006
The Clinton gambit
I've read worse suggestions...1
CWCID: Ezra Klein.
______________________________________
1. And, yes, I appreciate that he might screw it up. But Hillary has a stake in Iraq working out, and if her husband pulled it off it might solve a lot of problems all around. Partisan Republicans wouldn't be happy, but success would mean that both Democrats and Republicans were committed to a forward-leaning policy.
4 Comments:
By 
, at
Wed Mar 01, 12:54:00 AM:
I'd like to have a few of those "worse ideas" that you've heard spelled out - Rush Limbaugh as the French ambassador to the U.N.?
Sullivan can sometimes be insightful but he's periodically given to ideas that are child-like. This is one of them.
If you're Sistani do you really believe that Clinton can "deliver" Bush? Why would anyone listen to this guy at all?
Come on sticks, first your son in a Quaker school, now this? What's next, your daughter singing the Socialist Internationale with Carl G.?
By 
TigerHawk, at
Wed Mar 01, 05:58:00 AM:
It gets worse than that. We give money to the Equine Animals Humane Society.
By ScurvyOaks, at
Wed Mar 01, 10:55:00 AM:
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Wed Mar 01, 08:45:00 PM:
I see the attraction to the idea, but think it still falls apart. For those who believe that success in Iraq really is in everyone's best interest, giving the opposition some opportunity for credit is a bargain at twice the price. Clinton might perceive it as trading a Nobel Peace Prize for his wife's election, and jump on it.
But it would actually have to succeed. Clinton would get a lot of press claiming how well he was succeeding, especially in Europe, but I don't think he would accomplish much positive. No shame in that -- I don't think any one person is going to make much of a dent.
