Peggy Noonan weighs in on Hillary Clinton, remarking on Hillary's recent attempt to play the gender card, and the negative reaction that tactic received.
Noonan contrasts Margaret Thatcher and Hillary Clinton, too:
A word on toughness. Mrs. Clinton is certainly tough, to the point of hard. But toughness should have a purpose. In Mrs. Thatcher's case, its purpose was to push through a program she thought would make life better in her country. Mrs. Clinton's toughness seems to have no purpose beyond the personal accrual of power. What will she do with the power? Still unclear. It happens to be unclear in the case of several candidates, but with Mrs. Clinton there is a unique chasm between the ferocity and the purpose of the ferocity. There is something deeply unattractive in this, and it would be equally so if she were a man.
Another illustation of that aimless intensity in the pursuit of personal power may have come this week, with the revelation that Clinton's campaign planted a global warming question for Hiillary Clinton at a town hall meeting in Iowa.
Noonan makes a broader indictment of Clinton as well:
But I don't think Mrs. Clinton is the exemplar of a generation, she is the exemplar of a quadrant within a generation, and it is the quadrant the rest of us of that generation do not like. They came from comfort and stability, visited poverty as part of a college program, fashionably disliked their country, and cultivated a bitterness that was wholly unearned. They went on to become investment bankers and politicians and enjoy wealth, power or both.
"They . . . cultivated a bitterness that was wholly unearned." Sadly, that accurately describes so many on the left today, from John Kerry to Hillary Clinton to Keith Olbermann to Daily Kos.
Life is tough. It's the human condition.
Bitterness is different. Bitterness is optional. It's a choice.
A thankful heart is a better choice.
A wise person know that life can be hard for everyone, and that life is sometimes very hard for some of us -- and that it isn't always someone else's fault.
Update 1: Linked at Memorandum
Update 2: Don Surber asks: Why plant questions when reporters routinely throw Hillary Clinton softball questions anyway?
Look, I am not voting for her. But in her third campaign as a candidate, she has yet to be tested by a reporter. It might be in the nation’s best interest to test the woman before she is elected president.
Maybe reporters should pretend she is a Republican.
Update 3: Hot Air has Fox News video commentary.
Update 4: Fausta's blog says:
The most contrived, planned-ahead political campaign of the last 50 years would do it each and every time if they knew they could get away with it.
Update 5: Don't miss photo fun at Blue Crab Boulevard
Update 6: As commenter Andy B. points out, it has happened again. Clinton has been accused of planting another question for herself to answer, apparently at an earlier Iowa campaign event in April.
What a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive.
Update 7: From Thinkin'bout Stuff:
Again, just as in the previous incident, damage here goes beyond the plant; the need to plant a question highlights a continuing theme of HRC not being able to handle anything more challenging then a steady diet of soft, pulpy questions.
Update 8: Chris Muir weighs in with a good one:
So when is the last time you made an informed decision about who will become the next President? Watch this video it's about 3 minutes and hopefully it will change the way you vote this time.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7583989345371026705&q=%22ron+paul%22&total=12453&start=30&num=10&so=1&type=search&plindex=2
Posted by: Jared | November 10, 2007 at 04:28 AM
UPDATE: Fox News is now reporting on another Q & A planting incident by the Clinton campaign. Below's an excerpt and here's the link:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310417,00.html
Posted by: Andy B | November 10, 2007 at 07:15 PM