They're good. That's bad.

Pretzel logic is on overdrive going into Super Tuesday. William Greider admits that 'politics ain't beanbag: "That's what politics is always about. Tough, even nasty conflict is educational, also entertaining."

Then proceeds to blame the Clintons for being good at 'tough conflict':

"The one-two style of Clintons, however, is as informative as low-life street fighters. Mr. Bill punches Obama in the kidney and from the rear. When Obama whirls around to strike back, there stands Mrs. Clinton, looking like a prim Sunday School teacher and citing goody-goody lessons she learned from her 135 years in government."

All he's saying is politics is rough and the Clintons are really good at it. All the candidates have spouses who campaign for them. Grieder blames the Clintons for being better than the competition.

And this:

"I thought Obama did quite well in response, looked strong and stayed in character. But we shall see. He was compelled to play defense and to hope the audience recognized foul play. It's possible the Clintons won on points, simply by making Obama look like a confused young man who had to keep repeating what he had actually said."

Is he talking about the debate? Maybe Obama saw Bill up on the stage in Las Vegas but all I saw was Hillary. This just reads like Obama' gone cross-eyed in the heat. And does Grieder not remember just two weeks ago when Obama/Edwards doubled-teamed Hillary and she won the debate anyway.

Yes, the Clintons are good -- better than anyone on the Repub side. They beat the crap out of Newt Gingrich and they'd have beaten Karl Rove.


Post a Comment

<< Home