The Politicker

Clinton Sells Age and Experience, Austin Crowd Buys

Getty Images

AUSTIN, Texas—Last night, at her final pre-election rally here in Texas, Hillary Clinton once again invoked the prospect of a 3 a.m. call to the White House.

She told a crowd of around 3000 at the Burger Center sports facility that they should choose whichever candidate they would prefer to answer such a call.

Clinton also said that there was a big difference between “rhetoric and reality.”

Those isolated moments aside, however, she largely abjured the kind of full-frontal attack she has made on Obama elsewhere in recent days.

Two of the biggest ovations during Clinton’s 27-minute address came for an attack on President Bush and for a glancing allusion to her personal history.

Referring to the high price of gas, Clinton said, “If we had a president who wouldn’t just hold hands with the Saudis but would actually hold them accountable, we might be able to make some progress.”

And as she recalled living in Texas in 1972 while working on George McGovern’s presidential campaign, she said, “Now, granted, I am a little older”, then paused and added, “And I have earned every wrinkle on my face.” The comment elicited loud cheers.

Chelsea Clinton shared the stage with her mother, though she did not speak. Clinton-backing celebrity couple Ted Danson and Mary Steenburgen were also in attendance. They signed autographs and posed for photos for some time after the candidate finished speaking, as did Chelsea.

Though there was a significant amount of spare space in the arena, the supporters who turned up were vocal and enthusiastic. One homemade sign looked forward to the election of “Madam President,” while another urged “Hook ‘em, Hill!” – a reference, of course, to the famous slogan of the University of Texas.

Clinton for the most part sought to portray herself as the candidate best able to understand and solve the problems of the general public. This framework seemed to help Clinton connect with the crowd – a trick she is not always able to pull off – and applause greeted even fairly prosaic observations.

“Many people are concerned with just the daily struggles they face,” Clinton said in one such moment. “It may not sound like a really big deal to somebody who’s well-off but, you know, when gas goes up 10 cents a gallon that puts a big strain on the budgets of so many Texans.”

Continuing in the same tone, the former First Lady told the crowd, “I want you to hold me accountable…I want you to say ‘What are you going to do to make it happen?’”

The climax of her speech was based around a refrain about which candidate the public should “hire” to deal with various issues.

Clinton’s practical approach appealed to supporters like Wayne Simoneau, a 54-year-old from Dripping Springs, about 20 miles west of Austin. He defined her appeal in one word: “Experience.”

He added that he wanted “someone who has been around the block” in the White House.

But Simoneau was also impressed by the former First Lady’s stamina:

“She is a 60-year-old woman and she is putting in 18 and 20-hour days,” he said admiringly. “She has the energy of a 20-year old.”

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

renatam (not verified) says:

The undisclosed Clinton Library donors and Bill's also undisclosed business DEALS require a 3rd and 4th Term. If Americans buy into this setup and extension of the for-profit Bush/Clinton/Bush dynasties -- we deserve whatever we get and the world should not be smug about it, notwithstanding Bill's DEALS worldwide.

Carol (not verified) says:

Fuzz coming off Obama's Peach

SAN ANTONIO, Texas -- Led by the Chicago press corps that has covered Obama for years, the candidate today faced a barrage of questions in what turned out to be a contentious news conference. Questions centered on why his campaign had denied that a meeting occurred between his chief economic advisor and Canadian officials as well as questions on his relationship with Tony Rezko, a Chicago land developer and fast food magnate, now on trial for corruption charges.

renatam (not verified) says:

Here's the REAL fuzz -- that Hillary was kind enough to qualify herself and John McCain as EXPERIENCE! Anyone who VOTED FOR THIS WAR not only made Americans less safe, but have put in jeopardy the retirement security of the boomers and unbelievable burdens on Xers, Yers and Millenials as they raise families in an economic downturn. Turn the page!

The $3,000,000,000,000 War is a Domestic Issue
Posted March 3, 2008 | 12:39 PM (EST)
www.huffingtonpost.com

As our seemingly endless primary process reaches the homestretch and the focus shifts to the general election, we need to pull the plug on the media's disturbing habit of acting as if foreign policy and domestic policy are completely separate entities -- a pair of high stakes board games that can only be taken off the shelf and played one at a time. To hear the media tell it, combining the two would make about as much sense as using your Monopoly pieces to play Risk.

But while there is almost nothing about the Iraq war that can be labeled a success, we can declare that it has been exceedingly successful in showing how intertwined foreign and domestic policy actually are. In the book The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, along with co-author Linda Bilmes, argue that, even using "conservative assumptions," the Iraq war will cost at least $3,000,000,000,000, and likely as much as $5,000,000,000,000.

Stiglitz also argues that the war has played a major role in the current subprime credit crisis and our long, hard slog toward recession. Because of the cost of the war, the Fed flooded the system with credit. "The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," Stiglitz told The Australian's Peter Wilson.

The book (excerpted here by the Times of London, and here's an interview with the authors at Democracy Now) notes that the cost is 60 times the $50 - 60 billion we were told the war would cost by Don Rumsfeld. The Iraq war is already the second costliest war in American history, trailing only World War II.

Stiglitz makes the case that no country can fight a protracted war without deep and long-lasting effects on domestic policy. Particularly a protracted war paired with tax cuts. Now this doesn't mean a war shouldn't be fought (see World War II), but it does mean that our leaders should be honest about what the real costs will be. And not just in terms of dollars and cents but also in opportunity costs.

The single defining constant of the war over its disastrous, almost-five-years has been the complete and total lack of honesty from those who got us into it and have championed its continued prosecution -- including head war cheerleader John McCain. And although the driver of the 100 Year War Express is fond of offering frequent, empty, and clichéd nods to "sacrifice," he somehow thinks that's all the discussion that's needed about the costs of the war. Note to McCain: your protestations about "out of control" government spending would carry more weight if they weren't accompanied by calls for making permanent the tax cuts you once opposed as "not appropriate" in a time of war.

Maybe Saddam Hussein's head was worth $3,000,000,000,000 -- $5,000,000,000,000, maybe it wasn't (like most of the country, I believe the latter), but if McCain wants us to be there for 100, or 1,000, or a million years, he should be forced to make the case that the benefits outweigh the costs -- foreign and domestic.

As Crooked Timber's Daniel Davies notes, "the cost of the Iraq War could have underwritten Social Security for fifty years."

Or, as Aida Edemariam puts it in the Guardian, it would have paid for "8 million housing units, or 15 million public school teachers, or healthcare for 530 million children for a year, or scholarships to university for 43 million students." Of course, as John McCain himself has told us, he "doesn't really understand economics." But foreign policy does not exist in an economics vacuum.

Yet does anybody doubt that the general election is going to feature article after newscast after editorial extolling McCain's "foreign policy expertise?" Even if he's asked about the cost of remaining in Iraq, McCain will likely respond with some version of the Bush spin. "People like Joe Stiglitz," said the White House "lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can't even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11."

Ah, the well-worn 9/11 trump card -- up to now, always an effective debate-ender. Will it still work come this fall? To a large extent that will depend on whether the media are as cowed by it as they have been since the run-up to the Iraq invasion.

If the coverage of the "surge" is any indication, the odds aren't great there will be more truth telling this time. The media seem to have decided that the surge is already a notch on McCain's foreign policy belt. It's a notch the candidate will be able to finger long past November since, the way things have shaken out, the surge has only served to deepen our foothold in Iraq. In fact, many believe that was the point all along.

As Sam Brannen of CSIS notes, "The United States is now the thread that binds Iraq, and it is clear that a serious unraveling of the situation would occur were this thread suddenly to be pulled away." Which led Judah Grunstein to conclude: "In other words, instead of making it easier for us to leave Iraq, the Surge has made it more difficult. And if that doesn't qualify a military tactic as a failure, I don't know what does."

This, in turn, led Andrew Sullivan to say: "I'm not sure that the surge wasn't in retrospect a deliberate attempt to make it all but impossible for the US to leave Iraq any time soon. And less out of a genuine security worry, than in order to save face for Bush and Cheney."

So will John McCain be called to account for the surge, and the rising costs of the continuing occupation the surge has enabled? Not likely. Getting the media to avoid a full accounting of the costs of the war -- both in terms of dollars spent and lives lost or ruined -- was one of the primary goals of the surge. And, in that respect, it has been sadly successful.

The thing about $3,000,000,000,000 is that, at a certain point, it becomes hard to ignore. As the red ink from the approaching recession continues to spill, you can bet the media will be all over the story -- the economy headlined as America's top domestic worry. The question is, will the media connect the dots between the war John McCain loves so much and the economic devastation it's helped cause? The answer could determine who is the next president of the United States.

RobertB (not verified) says:

Renatam---How'd everything turn out in Texas and Ohio?

Steve G. (not verified) says:

All you hear are the crickets......

wow gold (not verified) says:
google (not verified) says:
wow gold (not verified) says:
wow gold (not verified) says:

You may compare the price then buy wow gold from us . It will be a great fun that you will save huge money. We know what a gamer need so that we will provide you a really instant way of delivery, if you buy world of warcraft gold, gold wow from us. Just place your order to buy wow gold from us then feel the world class service.

tales of pirates (not verified) says:
wow gold (not verified) says:

get it

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.