'She’s smart, extremely knowledgeable, thoughtful and unflappable. In a word, she’s presidential.'

[bigtree]

vlh ?@coton_luver 14h14 hours ago
#KYPrimary Another newspaper makes the case 4 Hillary - this time as the best choice for KY! http://www.kentucky.com/opinion/editorials/article75919472.html …


Hillary Clinton is the most-qualified person running for president of the United States and has demonstrated the deepest understanding of how to address the challenges facing Kentucky. Kentucky Democrats should vote for her in the May 17 primary...

Clinton, who has served as secretary of state and in the Senate representing New York, in addition to her eight years as first lady during her husband Bill Clinton’s presidency, has an impressive resume and a thorough knowledge of both this country and its place in the world. She’s smart, extremely knowledgeable, thoughtful and — after decades of withstanding virtually every possible attack — unflappable. In a word, she’s presidential...

She has consistently and effectively backed expanded access to health care and women’s rights. She has courageously defended Planned Parenthood and taken on the National Rifle Association during this campaign...

As for Kentucky-specific proposals, while in Ashland Clinton laid out her vision for something similar to the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe after World War II to help Central Appalachia recover from the economic devastation of the decline of coal. She spoke specifically to protecting miners’ health and pension benefits in the face of mine closures and bankruptcies. Her plan also calls for federal assistance to create alternative jobs in coal country and more money for research aimed at keeping coal in the nation’s energy mix while limiting its environmental impact.

Clinton’s more nuanced understanding of international relations and trade also makes her the stronger candidate. Sanders, and others, can thunder about trade agreements that cost Americans jobs but Kentucky, where the automotive industry employs tens of thousands, has benefited tremendously from international economic alliances. We can’t rely only on domestic employers or consumers to create the good jobs that everyone wants for Kentucky, particularly Eastern Kentucky.

This country and state need a president with the intelligence, experience and resilience to lead in a complex and dangerous world. Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate best suited for that job.


read: www.kentucky.com/opinion/editorials/article75919472.html

[KPN]

1. Only if you believe what you just said. Based on what I've seen and her record,

the only pieces I would agree to are smart (she's that for sure -- though given her attitude as I perceive it, I'd call it cunning) and unflappable (but so is Donald so what's that worth).

[rhett o rick]

10. Now if she was only interested in something other than accumulating wealth and power.

[Sheepshank]

12. you think Donald is unflappable?

wow....Hillary hatred really does cause blindness.

[TimPlo]

25. Well she wanted war with Iraq

And she pushed others for it with her speeches and it got passed. So she is motivated in voting to send us to war, well as long as you earmark some pork barrel money to her donors.

[riversedge]

46. You live in a Bernie Bubble.

[Shemp Howard]

2. She's unflappable under sniper fire, that's for sure.

Last edited Mon May 9, 2016, 01:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Assuming that there was sniper fire during her visit to Bosnia. But there wasn't any sniper fire. None. But she said there was.

Unflappable? No. However, another word comes to mind.

[Fumesucker]

3. If Hillary was so knowledgeable, thoughtful and smart she would never have been fooled by Dubya

[Shemp Howard]

7. Excellent point!

But there is one candidate out there who wasn't fooled by Dubya. Perhaps he's the one who should be called knowledgeable, thoughtful and smart.

[rhett o rick]

14. She wasn't fooled, she just couldn't pass up an opportunity to invade a country. The MIC prospered

and they were grateful to the The Clinton Family. I think she said something like this re. Iraq, "We came, we saw, he was hanged."

[oasis]

4. "Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person running for president".

True today, yesterday and tomorrow.

[Armstead]

11. Meh..so,so

Sorry...the devil made me do it

[RiverNoord]

16. The fascinating thing about qualifications for the office...

Here they are:

1) 35+ years old.

2) 'Natural born' citizen.

3) Has lived for at least 14 years in the United States.

3) Has not served 6 years or more in the office previously.

That's it.

There's been an enormous amount of discussion during the past year about who is 'qualified' for the office. But no one who has ever not been a President before has any genuinely relevant job experience. It's an unique job.

In the end, everyone who meets the Constitutional criteria is, in fact, qualified to be the President of the United States.

However, the 22nd Amendment's 2-term limit is maybe worth contemplating with respect to those qualifications. I sincerely doubt that the prospect of a spouse of a living former 2-term President was contemplated during the ratification process. However, the reason for the limitation raises an interesting question:

Are the purposes of the Amendment (which was admittedly pushed by Republicans unhappy with FDR's very long Presidency, but was ratified within 4 years by states within a wide political spectrum) defeated by the election of a spouse of a living President who served the two full terms in the office, whose likely most intimate confidante is, in fact, the spouse/former President?

I'm not making up a trivial issue here. I've always been concerned about family political legacies in our model of representative democracy. The danger is always that parties who have already had considerable interests and involvement under a prior President may return to exercise undue influence in the Executive. That's why I found the candidacy of Bush II so problematic, apart from the obvious 'this guy's a complete dumbass' issue. And we ended up with Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, etc. whose prior experience, in conjunction with the development of extreme perspectives on the use of United States military force, resulted in the Iraq war calamity.

Does anyone know who we would likely to see in key places in a Hillary Clinton Presidency, and what sorts of agendas they would be likely to bring with them?

That's what makes me worry that, perhaps, the least suitable (not 'qualified', but suitable) candidates for the Presidency are people who have already spent a lot of time very close to the office, via close familial ties to a prior President...

[oasis]

20. Qualified, suitable, eligible whatever. Hillary's the best American

available to do the job of the U.S. president. She's very well connected and respected by political and business leaders, worldwide.

To those who wish to play the "dynasty card" I would just ask them to view her situation no more differently than that of a long time company employee meritoriously working their way up the ladder.

[RiverNoord]

43. 'Dynasty card?'

That's how trite you consider the subject?

There is a colossal difference between a 'long time company employee meritoriously working their way up the ladder' and a candidate for the Presidency who is a child, sibling or spouse to a prior President.

Would you have ever described George W. Bush as a person who worked his way up a company ladder through merit to reach the office of the Presidency? Purely on the subject of political dynasty, there is no difference other than a much closer relationship between the current candidate and the past President family member.

[Demsrule86]

45. And what is the point?

She has won the primary and is not excluded by the rules...VP are also close to the president and run...she won and Bernie lost.

[RiverNoord]

48. Well, it's not quite over yet.

And if Hillary Clinton does become the Democratic nominee for the presidency, the identities and agendas of the parties that are likely to comprise the upper-level bureaucracy that come to power with her becomes even more important.

Who was talking about the neoconservative chickenhawks who were lined up to dominate the upper-level echelons of the foreign and military policy structure of the United States when George W. was running?

The answer is - hardly anyone. The race was framed as a relatively standard right v. left contest, with Gore both saddled with the deficiencies of President Clinton's personal conduct while in office and boosted by the fact that, taking the good with the bad, the two-term Presidency of Clinton had resulted in a federal government with reasonable prospects for tackling its debt and other fairly favorable conditions.

So virtually no voters were concerned about the power structures that they were really voting for. The President simply cannot make all executive branch decisions - it's impossible. So the President brings in a Cabinet and a great many upper-level appointees to manage most of the real work.

That's what concerns me. Trump has, at present, very little in the way of a power structure assembled for a potential presidency. But he will, and every person in that potential future administration should be scrutinized meticulously, and there are likely to be many very strange parties hopping on that bandwagon.

However, Hillary Clinton does have most of hers in place, and what I see there worries the hell out of me. Her campaign is managed by people with very, very strong connections to international finance companies, and many are likely to assume key roles in her administration. Goldman Sachs already has a massive revolving-door presence in the government, and that would likely even intensify in a Clinton Administration. Her campaign connections to international 'capital management' companies are also very close. All of these companies have simple agendas - clear domestic and foreign government hurdles to their initiatives.

What that means is that domestic policy concerning sophisticated, complex, and difficult to comprehend financial instruments and transactions will be relaxed. Anti-trust laws, already marginally enforced, might as well vanish from the U.S. Code, as they won't even be paid lip service, unless a particular deal appears to be disadvantageous to one or many of her 'financial sector' supporters. It also means that the foreign and military policy of the United States is likely to be shaped so as to provide maximum benefit to international financiers. That is where things get very, very problematic.

So that's the point. If you don't care and are only concerned with simple winning and losing, then you're one of the naive millions who are conditioned to ignore these extremely important aspects of Presidential politics.

[rhett o rick]

18. The problem is not how qualified she is, which is debatable, but what are her goals.

If she wants to amass more wealth and power, then we need to look elsewhere. The 99% can not survive more of the mammon of the status quo.

[oasis]

21. She's stated her goals, and an a majority of Democrats agree with her.

[rhett o rick]

22. She stated what she stated but has an integrity problem.

She said Iraq had WMD and were harboring al qaeda.

[oasis]

32. I'm pretty sure the majority of Democrats I just mentioned are aware of

Hillary's IWR vote. Perhaps another selection from your anti-Hillary smorgasbord would be a more effective game changer.

[rhett o rick]

36. I am guessing you think it's funny or clever to flaunt that her supporters don't

care what she has done or stands for. It scares the crap out of me. The status quo has given us the highest infant mortality rate of all modern nations, 2.5 million American children homeless, 16 million children living in poverty and another 16 million living in low income homes. The economy is booming for the 1% while our students can't afford college and more and more are losing jobs or are under employed. The status quo wants to hold down the min wage to below a living wage and cut safety nets. SS and Medicare will be attacked while the defense spending will continue to increase. But none of this is important to those that want to see a Clinton Aristocracy. A Goldman-Sachs/Koch Bros backed admin will not fight for the 99%.

[Fawke Em]

26. 55 percent of Democrats with little Independent support doesn't win general elections. eom

[oasis]

34. See the list on post #16. Fawke Em, you too, could beat Trump

if you met the qualifications and became our nominee.

[rhett o rick]

38. The hubris of the Democratic Party Elite will be the party and nations downfall. nm

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. They should concentrate on McConnell, Paul, and Kim Davis.

- clean up their own yard first.

[juxtaposed]

6. I agree Elizabeth Warren is all that, Not hrc!

[rhett o rick]

8. Some say "cold and calculating", preferring toughness to empathy. nm

[bigtree]

9. 'some say'

Some say we'll never get it off the ground
And some say we'll never make it out of town
And someday we'll end up a world apart
And some say we're a couple of crazy kids
And some say that's exactly what they did
And I say you got to go with your heart
And baby, look where we are

-Rascal Flatts

[Armstead]

13. And some say we can do better than trying to revive the 90's

Especially in light of all that has happened since the 90's because of the Corporate and Wall St. orientation of too much of the Clinton/DLC approach to government by money.

[NurseJackie]

15. Bernie's not getting many endorsements from major newspapers, is he? (I wonder why.)

[Fawke Em]

29. Because most media is owned by six large corporations who will finally have to pay

their fair share under Bernie.

That's why.

[NurseJackie]

33. It's always a conspiracy, isn't it?

Next you'll probably be saying that they fear the Clinton Revenge Machine.

You guys crack me up!

[whatchamacallit]

17. "Presidential" may be the most subjective, and therefore useless, descriptor ever.

[Surya Gayatri]

19. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting.

[Shandris]

23. "I'm unable to understand how security, email, or classified info works. I'm smart."

Oh oh, here, let me try again.

"Here at the Lexington Herald, we think 'Presidential' means to avoid indictment for things that would have sent other people to jail for well over 1,000 years. We also think that's definitely the kind of individual we need to lead a nation that claims to be about the 'Rule of Law'. Also, we marry our sisters."

Nice bunch of people. I'm sure they're totally not being paid or anything, like that guy in Atlanta.

[bigtree]

37. "Also, we marry our sisters."

..."nice"

[Shandris]

39. Being from Indiana, and an actual Kentuckianan, I'm more that welcome to use whatever...

...appellation I want to about those I spy around me, and anyone dumb enough to print that headline is clearly demonstrating the results of inbreeding.

[bigtree]

41. Indiana and Kentucky

...please come collect this.

[laruemtt]

24. I see they omitted her integrity. Oh wait....

[closeupready]

27. lol.

[frylock]

28. Plants crave it.

[vintx]

42. lol

[w4rma]

30. And completely corrupted. (nt)

[jack_krass]

31. Power-hungry, connected, cold, calculating, ruthless, member of the 1%, in a word...

Diabolical

[oasis]

35. Don't forget her addiction to hot sauce.

[vintx]

40. Unflappable? Really?

[bigtree]

44. kick

[SwampG8r]

47. Ask blm and the anti fracking lady how " unflappable" she is

She was flapping like a flounder any time shes questioned