Have We Over-Estimated Hillary?

From the moment Bill and Hillary Clinton entered the White House in 1992, they've been like sand in our national shorts. We have felt their presence, even when we haven't seen them.

Mr. Clinton soon became "Slick Willie." We marvelled at his ability to squirm free of trouble. Always suspected, but never indicted. Hillary scared the heck out of us with her iceberg ways and that gnarly health care scheme that she was "put in charge of" as First Lady.

Some of us cried when Hillary ran for the Senate in '98. Some of us cried Hallejuha! I myself cringed at the thought of yet another President Clitnon. As time passed, Hillary's reputation actually grew. The mainstream media seemed to fall in love with the idea of her being the candidate who was man enough to defeat George W. Bush.

The events of 9-11 made W un-beatable. Even so, Hillary remained locked and loaded, ready for the next opportunity to take up the Democratic battle flag.

Mrs. Clinton's veneer of invulnerabilty fell off faster than Monica's blue dress when Barack Obama came on to the sceme, "for real."

"The Clinton Machine" has performed poorly in 2008, as if it were somehow past warranty. Bill and Hillary have NOT made any of the bold blitzy moves that we know they could be capable of. Hillary's lackluster speaking style should be bottled and sold as a sleeping aid. The Clinton Genius appears to be...gone.

So, here's my question. Were the Clintons ever really "that good," or have we been building them up in our collective nightmares because we're just so darned afraid of what they represent?

Or, is there some other reason for their failure in this election? Time and time again, we see them pass up opportunities for the good zinger, or the superior photo op. Have they fired their best speech writers? Does Hillary actually write her own stuff?

I'd like to know what YOU think.

Well it is important to note that Bill and Hillary are two differnt people all right wing jokes , puns and criticisms aside. Time has also moved on since Bill left office the global climate is very differnt post 9-11 . I am not writing Hillary off no doubt she and Bill are working behind closed doors to bring the Superdelegates on board.

I'm not a big fans of Bill or Hillary but I think the hatred of Bill stems from the fact that at the time the economy and times in general were good. The Republican party couldn't handle that he wasn't another Carter. The American right showed ans still does that it is out of touch with the rest of the population.

IMO the wider population in the US and elsewhere could ID with Bill . I have yet to meet anyone in person who can ID with Bush. People are more likely to ask how someone as naive and out of his depth as Bush is gets any where near the White House.

The Clintons are just actors, playing parts for their livelihood. The are not real leaders. Real leaders, with real public interests would die almost instantly. We are simply not allowed to have them. Anyone who would raise their head as a real leader would be bought off, extorted, corrupted, managed in the media or just killed. We do not live in the world you think we do. We live in a world of lies and control.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are in a very close race. If Clinton loses, it won't necessarily be because of any huge failing on her part but rather because Obama is such a strong contender. The years Bill Clinton was in office are remembered fondly by many Americans as a time of relative peace and prosperity. People often consider Hillary more of the same "brand" they were satisfied with from 1992-2000, a few scandals notwithstanding. The fact that she is a woman is a problem for many voters, much as this subject is avoided in political discussions. She is pictured by her detractors as overbearing and "unfeminine." Even Democrats who have no problem with her gender, however, may decide that Obama is ultimately more electable. Hillary might just prove to be not charming enough for enough voters to win in November.

I think Sestias summed it up quite nicely. Let me add my own .02.

Hillary never appealed to me. She reached her Peter Principle as jilted First Lady, imo. Otherwise, she is not an attractive person at all, and I'm not talking about physical appearance. She has a very over-rated opinion of herself. Her campaign speeches are always peppered with instances of "The failures of this administration..". Her reaction to Obama's rise has been mainly personal attacks.

She never did start out on the right foot with me. Whitewater, Vince Foster, Bill's numerous sexual peccadilloes, all made me feel that they were.... slimy. Not really what you would want to represent our country.

She even said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary.

But that's all just my personal opinion.

I think we haven't yet seen the true meanness of Hillary Rodham Clinton. I fully expect that if Obama is in the lead at the DNC, she will pull more shenanigans with superdelegates and/or the exiled delegates from Florida and Michigan.

The Clinton political machine is a very powerful and capable one, no doubt about it. But machine is what it is. Obama has a very strong grassroots appeal. It will be interesting to see which will win out - machine or grassroots.

I begin to notice that the mainstream media is beginning to turn on Barack Obama. Even so, we now find that Senator Clinton is not in a good place. She's in a win or lose moment as regards Texas, which could revive or ruin her campaign.

If Mrs. Clinton comes back from the edge, will the MSM suck up to her more than she deserves? Will they kick Obama just a little bit harder?

Ironically (or maybe not), Hillary made a comment this week to the effect that Obama has not been held up to media scrutiny. Maybe the Clinton's allies in the MSM took that as a call to arms...