Inspired by the latest of the unfounded claims that Barack Obama is little more than smoke and mirrors, I’d like her supporters to give me one substantial piece of legislation of any significance that Hillary Clinton has sponsored, that has become law, in her seven years in the Senate. Tell me one thing she’s done, with demonstrable results, that show how she’s able to build bridges and work alongside her Republican counterparts. I want to know just one success she’s had that is in any way related to any of her campaign claims as to what she’ll be able to accomplish as President.
I, and quite a few other Obama supporters here, have repeatedly responded to calls from the Hillary side to describe in detail exactly what Barack Obama has accomplished and how he’ll work to change things in Washington. You can see some of my responses here, here, here, here, and even here, in the very thread the newest “smoke and mirrors” allegation against Obama was made.
As you will note, I stuck to discussing what Barack Obama has done, and how that translates into what he will be able to do if he were President. Therefore, I am asking the same consideration in response to this thread. I want to know what Hillary Clinton has done, specifically, that proves that she will be able to accomplish any of her campaign promises.
It is my contention that Hillary Clinton is running on nothing but the idea that electing her as the first woman to be President of the United States would be an historic thing and therefore good for America because it will bring a woman’s perspective to the job. And while that might be true in general, I don’t believe it is at all meaningful with regard to whether or not Hillary herself will make a good President.
So to me, it’s resolved: Hillary Clinton is nothing but smoke and mirrors.
It’s an analysis like this one that makes one wonder what the hell she is doing making claims against Obama - and his lack of experience. Clinton’s record pales when shown next to his. The voters have reflected this - Obama is ahead in the overall popular vote and overall delegate count, what does that say in and of itself?
If Barack Obama had not entered this race, I believe that Senator CLinton would be the presumptive nominee right now locked in in all but fact. And I imagine that many people on these boards, loathe to vote Republican under any circumstances, would be supporting her. Perhaps tepidly, but they would. In fact, I think you’d be one of them.
All that is to say that I think there are plenty of reasons a fair-minded person could support Senator Clinton. What I think is more compelling argument than “There’s no reason at all to support her, period,” is that, when measured against Senator Obama, she falls short in many respects.
I’m not a Democrat, and frankly I am pretty darned impressed with Barack Obama, so I’m maybe not the best person to answer this post. But I don’t like the implication that no reasonable person could support Hillary Clinton.
I don’t think that’s the point, and I agree that a reasonable person can support her. But I would say that no reasonable person can oppose Obama stricktly on the fact that he has not achieved things in the Senate, and support Clinton for the opposite reason.
Extremely valid point, and it’s one of the things that consistently irritated me about the SDMB environment then. It wasn’t enough to support Senator Kerry – no, no, you had to make sure everyone knew that only a evil lunatic son-of-a-bitch would support Bush.
I believe that you are wrong; I would be supporting John Edwards.
Where did I imply that no reasonable person could support Hillary Clinton anywhere in that OP? I’m merely countering the tired allegation of Obama being nothing more than smoke and mirrors with the same allegation pointed towards Hillary Clinton. So far, both on this board and through her campaign, I have heard nothing of substance that compels me to believe she’d have any success in getting all her grand ideas passed.
Even if I thought she had better ideas and plans than Barack Obama, I want to know how she’s going to get them done. What exactly makes her qualified, let alone more qualified, to be the person who answers that ridiculous 3AM phone call? What has her 7 years of legislative experience brought us in the way of change? With all her knowledge of the inner workings of Washington, what positive impact has she had on our current government and how it operates? It’s what she tells us her qualifications will bring. So where’s the evidence of it?
These questions have been asked repeatedly on this board about Barack Obama. We’ve all answered them, and answered them with specifics that back up our assertions. Now I’m asking the Hillary supporters to do the same. It’s as simple as that. And I think it’s a fair question.
Look at the their records via the Library of Congress. Here and here. Most of them got referred to committee and forgotten. Neither Clinton nor Obama has accomplished that much in Congress.
One bill passed sponsored by Obama, S.RES.133: “A resolution celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl Patterson.”
And S.RES.268:"A resolution designating July 12, 2007, as “National Summer Learning Day.”
It’s the curse of the Senator. Being a largely collaborative body, it’s hard to pin down what any one Senator has actually done. OTOH, it’s easy to distort a Senator’s legislative history to spin any number of narratives. Which is why they usually don’t win, and why this race has been so interesting-- the front runners in the Democratic primary have all been Senators. Clinton, Obama, Edwards.
A. Straw man. You don’t have to be evil, lunatic, and a son of a bitch to support Bush.
B. Of course reasonable people may disagree. Plenty of people are both reasonable & underinformed, or reasonable & morally deficient.
C. However reasonable & well-intentioned Bush’s supporters are, & however well-intentioned Bush himself is, Bush himself is still a criminal, & was in 2004.
Yeah, that’s a change. Even Johnson only got to be president because of the assassination. But he had been a master of the Senate, and he used that to pull off historic legislation. I don’t see either Clinton or Obama having that edge.
Uh, Shayna, forgive me if this has actually been covered, but what executive experience does Obama have that qualifies him for that “three in the morning” phone call? I think claiming that HRC doesn’t have it only helps John McCain.
Though to be fair, the closest John McCain has come to executive power was as a minor military officer a long time ago. He’s not a wielder of great personal authority either.
Given our federalist structure, you might think a state governor has the experience, but states don’t have autononmous militaries. I suspect nobody really is ready to be President unless they’ve previously been in the executive command structure, such as WH Chief of Staff, one of the Joint Chiefs, or Attorney General. Why doesn’t someone with that kind of experience run?
I’m voting for whomever the democratic nominee may be.
That said, I fear that if Obama is elected, he may be stonewalled for 4 years and leave office having not only gotten nothing of significance done, but also having all future non old-white-guys maligned as ineffectual. I do think (and fear) it is within the republican party to make this happen.
This is not the kind of leadership we need ever, and certainly not at this time.
I don’t suppose you have a criminal law that Bush broke, and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he broke that law, though. Do you?
With similar disregard for actual facts, I could say that Barack Obama is a criminal, based on his association with Rezko.
But I won’t, because, unlike you, I won’t level accusations of criminality without sufficient evidence. Not liking the man’s policies does not equate to his being a criminal – merely to your own hysteria and hyperbole.
Let me put it differently than Bricker did. It is your opinion (maybe well informed, maybe not so well informed) that Bush was and is a criminal. Reasonable people may disagree with you on that. Personally, I believe that there is a good chance he could be convicted in a court of law, but it would be far from a slam dunk.
And let me put it differently than either Bricker or John Mace: if you want a “bash Bush” thread go open your own.
I’m not excited about one more thread chewing over the Democrat candidates, but I see no reason to have to watch it degenerate into another slam on Bush (who is not running–until he suspends the elections to fight terror, or whatever :rolleyes: ).
First of all, those links don’t work. What does work are the links Hillary has provided on her Senate web page that I linked to in this post, where I also provided a list of all the legislation she has sponsored (at least that which is linked to on her site), and which has been passed into Law.
What it failed to include, I admit, were those laws passed during the 110th Congress, which in all fairness to me, was simply because she didn’t list it on her website. But for full disclosure, here it is, in its entirety:
In the 110th Congress[ul][li]S.694 : A bill to direct the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations to reduce the incidence of child injury and death occurring inside or outside of light motor vehicles, and for other purposes.[/ul] And so no one has to go digging around to that other thread (even though I’ve linked directly to the post in question), I’ll re-post all of her Sponsored bills that have made it into Law in the previous 3 Congresses: [/li]
In the 107th Congress [ul][li]S.584 : A bill to designate the United States courthouse located at 40 Centre Street in New York, New York, as the “Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse”.[/li][li]S.1422 : A bill to provide for the expedited payment of certain benefits for a public safety officer who was killed or suffered a catastrophic injury as a direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line of duty in connection with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.[/li][li]S.1622 : A bill to extend the period of availability of unemployment assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act in the case of victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.[/li][li]S.1892 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 375 Carlls Path in Deer Park, New York, as the “Raymond M. Downey Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.2496 : A bill to provide for the establishment of investigative teams to assess building performance and emergency response and evacuation procedures in the wake of any building failure that has resulted in substantial loss of life or that posed significant potential of substantial loss of life, and for other purposes.[/li][li]S.2918 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 380 Main Street in Farmingdale, New York, as the “Peter J. Ganci, Jr. Post Office Building”.[/ul] In the 108th Congress[ul][]S.1241 : A bill to establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site in the State of New York, and for other purposes.[/li][li]S.1266 : A bill to award a congressional gold medal to Dr. Dorothy Height, in recognition of her many contributions to the Nation.[/li][li]S.1425 : A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize the New York City Watershed Protection Program.[/li][li]S.2838 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10 West Prospect Street in Nanuet, New York, as the “Anthony I. Lombardi Memorial Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.2839 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 555 West 180th Street in New York, New York, as the “Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda Post Office”. [/ul]In the 109th Congress[ul][]S.272 : A bill to designate certain National Forest System land in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.[/li][li]S.1283 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a program to assist family caregivers in accessing affordable and high-quality respite care, and for other purposes.[/li][li]S.2376 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 80 Killian Road in Massapequa, New York, as the “Gerard A. Fiorenza Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.2722 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 170 East Main Street in Patchogue, New York, as the “Lieutenant Michael P. Murphy Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.3613 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, New York, as the “Major George Quamo Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.3716 : A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 100 Pitcher Street in Utica, New York, as the “Captain George A. Wood Post Office Building”.[/li][li]S.3910 : A bill to direct the Joint Committee on the Library to accept the donation of a bust depicting Sojourner Truth and to display the bust in a suitable location in the Capitol.[/ul][/li]
Now, what it also doesn’t include is co-sponsored legislation because after searching for about an hour, I couldn’t find anything that was a “joint” bill, or that she didn’t sign on to much later as one of many “co-sponsors”, so I gave up because frankly, I’m kind of busy at work, and that’s actually the work I asked her supporters to do in this thread, so why should I do all of their homework for them?
As for Obama, I’ll politely ask if you followed any of the links in my OP. I’m guessing not, or you would know about The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006, The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, and the major Death Penalty reform he got enacted while in the Illinois Legislature.
I think these are highly indicative of the type of work President Obama would do, as well as indicative of how good he would be at getting people from both/all sides together to come to consensus and to get things done.
What I’m asking here is, what major accomplishments does Hillary Clinton have that offer similar representation of her body of work as it would apply to President H. Clinton? What has she done, so I can imagine what she will do?
I didn’t ask about Hillary’s “executive” experience, I asked about her Legislative experience. I also never claimed that Hillary isn’t qualified to answer that call. I’m asking her supporters to tell me what experience she has that does make her qualified in their opinion. Merely citing time in office isn’t gonna cut it. Bench-warmers don’t win Superbowls. What has she done?
Also, everyone please leave the Bush bashing hijack out of this thread. Thanks.