The Washington Post carried a strange story on its front page Tuesday (May 30). It was headlined, "Clinton Is A Politician Not Easily Defined: Senator's Platform Remains Unclear."
Were the story about a Republican politician, the Post headline might characterize such a person as having no convictions and being opportunistic.
The tone of the piece by Dan Balz resembles that of a supporter who wishes Hillary Clinton would be clearer about where she stands on which issues. Balz writes: "Clinton's roles as senator, first lady, governor's wife, lawyer and children's advocate have given her a depth of experience that few national politicians can match ..."
If that is so, why does Balz not know whether she has any strong convictions, other than the conviction she should be president? Indeed, Balz seems to invalidate his claim about Clinton's "experience" in the rest of his paragraph: "... but she is still trying to demonstrate whether these (roles) yielded a coherent governing philosophy. For now she is defined by a combination of celebrity and caution that strategists say leaves her more vulnerable than most politicians to charges that she is motivated more by personal ambition and tactical maneuver than by a clear philosophy."
Whatever gave Balz the notion that a Clinton - Bill or Hil - would be motivated by personal ambition in which she and he are most experienced?
Hillary Clinton has tried to get to the right of President Bush on the volatile immigration issue, saying she is against illegals and employers who hire them. If immigration becomes a single issue for some voters - as abortion is for some - Mrs. Clinton could possibly pick off votes in certain red states where the issue is hottest. She has attempted to sound moderate on abortion, calling it a "tragic choice," ignoring that if it were not a human life being destroyed there would be nothing tragic about it. She's supported a meaningless and constitutionally dubious bill to make flag burning a crime, and she has advocated a crackdown on violent video games and supported the war in Iraq.
As with all things Clinton, any or all of these positions could be rendered inoperative if they are seen to be an impediment to her ultimate goal of becoming president.
Great Moments in Human Rights: Mandated “Emotional Support” Animals in College Dorms | Daniel J. Mitchell