Thursday, October 11, 2007
The most unlikely campaign promise ever made
Hillary Clinton's most recent campaign promise has to be one of the least likely-to-be-kept promises of all time:
Senator Hillary Clinton said yesterday that if she is elected president, she intends to roll back President Bush's expansion of executive authority, including his use of presidential signing statements to put his own interpretation on bills passed by Congress or to claim authority to disobey them entirely.
Of all the leading Democrats, HRC is by far the least likely to roll back the power of the executive branch. She was a chief defender of that power when her husband was in the White House, and as president will not voluntarily relinquish any of the power that George W. Bush has -- supposedly -- arrogated to his office. Indeed, if she lives up to her promises to be a more competent president than her predecessor, it is likely that she will increase the power of the presidency by combining the precedents set by the Bush administration with more articulate communication and effective advocacy.
10 Comments:
By 
reddog, at
Thu Oct 11, 03:32:00 PM:
I doubt she would utilize signing statements or authorize warrantless wiretaps.
I do not doubt that if she gets a strong enough majority in both houses she will be every bit as autocratic and twice as dangerous, since she is at least twice as smart.
By 
, at
Thu Oct 11, 03:44:00 PM:
I doubt that she would authorize legal collection on enemies of the USA as she hasn't a shred of moral courage. I do not doubt that she would use presidential signing statements as she is all about power.
She is definitely autocratic, but it is a reach to call anyone as leftist and so blindly accepting of socialist propaganda as 'smart'. I have no doubt that she would talk about diplomacy and 'reaching out', while doing the opposite.
By , at
Thu Oct 11, 03:47:00 PM:
They will say anything to get elected i mean IF I AM ELECTED I WILL CUT TAXES but as well know liberal demacrats want more taxes for their pork projects and the wicked witch has no inttention to lower taxes just rasie them and increasing regulations and establishing the NORTH AMERICAN UNION we dont need hillary in the whitehouse she would far worse then bill BEWARE OF BIG SISTER MEANER THEN BIG BROTHER
By , at
Thu Oct 11, 06:17:00 PM:
Just one of my narrow minded beliefs, but I would wager that every president since telephones became popular and commonplace has authorized, or his AG or FBI, has authorized, warrantless wiretaps.
Some were for legitimate reasons of National Security, and some were probably to grind a political axe.
Hillary Clinton is only human; don't ascribe to her superhuman powers to do good or evil. And I doubt she is "twice as smart" as any president that has held the office since the turn of the century (20th century). It would frankly be really scary to actually elect someone who was "twice as smart" as everybody else, because they would probably have a huge ego to go with that super intelligence.
I , personally would rather see signs of wisdom and a respect for the limits the reach of contstitutional government than "smart". But again, I'm pretty narrow minded and old fashioned that way.
-David
By Georg Felis, at
Thu Oct 11, 06:32:00 PM:
How dare you insult the Great One in this underhanded fashion. If Hillary (tm) says she is going to do something in office, she will. Unless something comes up. Like an unexpected change in the Iraq situation. Or economic problems. Or something. Look over there! It's a Republican doing something naughty!
By , at
Thu Oct 11, 10:15:00 PM:
Well she will certainly know how to spy domestically, if Bill is still around. The left never complained when Bill was spying on law abiding citizens, only when W spies on their terrorist comrades.
SEW
By , at
Fri Oct 12, 08:53:00 AM:
Hillary who? Say, wasn't she the one who was favored to take the Democratic nomination until Al Gore entered the race?
Or perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.
Unquestionably, the most intriguing story of the day is Gore's co-winning of the Nobel Prize, and if it means he'll enter the race. I'd expect him to be immensely popular with Dems who (1) think Edwards and Obama are too inexperienced for the office or (2) are justifiably frightened to death by Hillary.
And, while we may not agree with Gore's environmental policies, I'd remind us of two things:
A. Presidents don't make laws. He can push his green agenda all he wants, but he'll still have to convince a whole pisspot full of Congresscritters, and, if anything, we'll probably get some watered-down law that we, ourselves, won't notice outside of yet another tax hike on gasoline.
B. Since Gore has been talking about nothing but the environment for years, I'm not sure if anyone has a clue what his actual positions are on the various issues of the day. But I think there's one thing we can all be relatively sure of:
They've got to be a LOT better than Hillary's.
Personally, I expect him to run, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear later that the entire decision was based on whether or not he received the Nobel. Because really -- you won the popular vote the last time you ran, your name has world recognition as a 'savior', and now you've won the Nobel Peace Prize? How could you NOT run?
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Oct 12, 09:03:00 AM:
With Jimmy Carter as his running mate. They're two of a kind, these days.
By Frederick, at
Fri Oct 12, 09:04:00 AM:
Funny, I do believe this is the first time I can remember agreeing with a post here...congrats, welldone.
By , at
Fri Oct 12, 11:39:00 AM:
Well Fred, I would say congrats to you. Most of the posts here are quite good, until BDS breaks through.
And congrats to Al for officially joining the ranks of those who provided ever lasting peace in the Middle East, Yassar and Jimmy, the famous economist and warrior in addition to his peace making skills. I think Yassar must have gotten AIDS from a doorknob or sneeze.
