As we well know from eight years of President Bill Clinton and six of Hillary as New York's senator, their parameters for decency and honesty have never been defined, although in her presidential campaign she appears positively antsy to advance into uncharted territory.I don't much care for Hillary Clinton's policies nor do I care for most of the liberal agenda. The difference between Hillary and I is that I would never stoop so low as to claim my opponent was insenstive and uncaring about Americans. You cannot be running for President without caring about Americans, and you certainly cannot be President without such concerns.
Boiled down to the ad's core message, market based solutions to the problems of health care access and affordability for the liberals are at once cruel and inequitable. Indeed, their solutions for everything, from wage disparities to health care is either higher taxes, more regulation or both.
Her despicable statement that the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq are "invisible" to the president is the liberal's equivalent of accusing him of not caring--talk about 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. We can argue about the merits of Mr. Bush's strategy but few presidents have exhibited such an unwavering support and admiration for our military on the front line.
However, with all the handwringing and post-mortems about how the now departing Karl Rove debased politics, why doesn't more of the media look at the politics of personal destruction that have become the calling card of the Clintons? Taking the low road seems all to easy for Hillary Clinton and we have to wonder how such a tendency will translate itself to being the leader of the free world?