Why can't Hillary be more like Obama?

[RunInRed 16,360]

My thoughts on her are summed up pretty well in this article ...

They thought she’d changed. They thought maybe she’d picked up a little bit from them about how people respond to awkward secret arrangements and contrived ways of not telling the full story.

...

With so much on the line, with so much time to prepare, she’s back to classic Clinton? She’s flubbing a campaign kickoff eight years in the making because she somehow thought that no one would ever care that she set up a secret email server? That anyone would then accept her word that it was OK that she deleted 30,000 emails even though the State Department had been asking for some of them? And then go silent again?

After all, 2008’s “Change you can believe in” campaign slogan wasn’t just a reference to George W. Bush. It was also about her, and the uneasy feeling many people had that with Clinton, something else was always going on.

Obama aides had had that feeling themselves, even after she joined the administration and their staffs tried following Obama’s and Clinton’s leads in building mutual trust, almost to the point of suspension of disbelief.

“You never feel like you’re quite getting the full story, because everyone’s got some side deal or some complicating factor,” said one former Obama aide, reflecting on dealing with Clinton and her circle. “I don’t think there was a conscious effort to watch out for scams. It was more just, you know who you’re dealing with.”

Obama put the priority on keeping clear records when he issued guidelines about using official email accounts, one White House aide noted after Clinton’s news conference, while obviously the former secretary of state determined her priority was something else.

Say what you will about the Obama White House — and there is a lot to say, from what allies gripe is a disregard for any political interests other than the president’s, to a stumbling learning curve for how things actually get done in Washington — but the scandals of Obama’s past six years have never been about personal gain.

Political malpractice, ridiculous management failures, an often insistently tin ear for what Americans say they want to hear out of their leaders, sure. As much as critics complain that Obama’s not running the country or the world well, no one’s said that he or the people close to him are putting money in their pockets, or cutting a corner or fudging the rules out of “convenience,” or because technically it’s allowed, or because no one specifically told them no.

Rewind to the 1990s and it’s almost amazing to think about: More than two years into Obama’s second term and more than two months into Republican control of Congress, there still hasn’t been a special prosecutor. The situations that seemed like they were getting close— the supposed IRS investigation into tea party groups, probably most of all — have fizzled under more scrutiny and information. The Veterans Affairs scandal, the only one that got so bad he had to toss out a Cabinet secretary over it, has stabilized enough that Obama’s comfortable making a special trip Friday to the Phoenix facility that sparked the outrage to brag about how much his administration’s gotten changed. And nothing shook the West Wing like the Obamacare website launch, that still, no one’s really been able to explain how it went that wrong.

Republican rhetoric has burned hot: “This looks an awful lot like Iran-Contra,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), then-chairman of the Government Oversight Committee, said at one point about the “Fast and Furious” gun operation. “This makes Watergate look like child’s play,” then-Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said about Solyndra. Also said to be worse than Watergate over Obama’s time in office: Fast and Furious, national security leaks, the efforts to keep Joe Sestak out of a 2010 Pennsylvania Senate primary, and, of course, Benghazi.

But no charges ever stuck, and Benghazi is the only one that’s drawn a special House committee to investigate. It’s the only one that continues to unspool new questions. But that one is about Clinton, not Obama — and has stayed alive not because anyone has yet found anything actually wrong but because there keeps being just enough there to raise more questions about what exactly she was up to.

A lot of this has to do with what Obama aides refer to as a culture clash. The Clintons look for loopholes, they say, while Obama takes a special pride, particularly on transparency issues, in sticking to the letter of the law: a combination of cockiness that he’s right, so why not let everyone see how he got there, as well as a background awareness that any scandal would be a scandal for the first African-American president.

“The president has been willing to say and implement provocative policies to shake up Washington,” said one current White House aide. “Willingness to send those signals is a good way to make clear to people that this is the way we’re going to do business: differently.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-email-obama-white-house-116021.html#ixzz3VFK2fMAZ

[cooltigger21 0]

6 of one half a dozen of the other as far as beliefs go. She isn't as slick as Bill or Obama.

[autigeremt 6,569]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

[RunInRed 16,360]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

The Dems love her because there's not much of an alternative at this point ... and she can win.

[AURaptor 1,121]

6 of one half a dozen of the other as far as beliefs go. She isn't as slick as Bill or Obama.

Because she's a woman, or maybe because she's HILLARY, I bet she thinks she doesn't HAVE to be 'slick'.

It's her turn, her time and by god, it should simply be GIVEN to her. No matter what.

[autigeremt 6,569]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

The Dems love her because there's not much of an alternative at this point ... and she can win.

Only because she's a woman and the emotions behind a vote for her. To hell with leadership or track record. I hope Warren runs.....

[RunInRed 16,360]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

The Dems love her because there's not much of an alternative at this point ... and she can win.

Only because she's a woman and the emotions behind a vote for her. To hell with leadership or track record. I hope Warren runs.....

You and me both.

[WarTim 3,456]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

The Dems love her because there's not much of an alternative at this point ... and she can win.

Only because she's a woman and the emotions behind a vote for her. To hell with leadership or track record. I hope Warren runs.....

You and me both.

That makes three of us.

[TitanTiger 20,471]

Elizabeth Warren is very close to someone I could support if all there was to consider were fiscal/economic matters. I'd like to have someone that doesn't kowtow to the big banks and corporations. But she almost couldn't be more liberal on other issues that I just can't in good conscience support.

[cooltigger21 0]

6 of one half a dozen of the other as far as beliefs go. She isn't as slick as Bill or Obama.

Because she's a woman, or maybe because she's HILLARY, I bet she thinks she doesn't HAVE to be 'slick'.

It's her turn, her time and by god, it should simply be GIVEN to her. No matter what.

She thought the same thing in 2008. Didn't work out so good.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I'm amazed anyone would vote for someone who lied about their heritage. That's pretty fundamental.

[cooltigger21 0]

I'm amazed anyone would vote for someone who lied about their heritage. That's pretty fundamental.

Democrats don't care about that sort of thing. It's acceptable in order to advance the progressive agenda.

[TheBlueVue 177]

She's a snake, but the Democrats love her.

Having another Obama and wishing she was more like him says a lot about those who want more of this garbage. Same goes for those on the opposite side of the isle. No win situation for America.

The Dems love her because there's not much of an alternative at this point ... and she can win.

her ability to win remains to be seen. of course the MSM has virtually coronated her already and she hasn't even formally announce yet. of course the dems love her but they dont like the inevitable baggage that comes with an unscupulous grabber more into personal enrichment than anything associated with above board and forthright governance. I mean, Hill and Bill actually pilfered items from Air Force 1 and stole antiques from the WH that they were forced to return. Hillary is an unethical and ruthless self serving influence peddling govt parasite but precious little else. She claims to stand for womens rights yet takes $millions and $millions of dollars from govts with THE WORST records of women's right in the world.