Thursday, February 14, 2008

Clinton/Clemens and House Democrats

Elliot Ganchrow writes:

It had been my belief during the summer that Senator Clinton, despite her weaknesses as a candidate would prevail over Senator Obama for three reasons: money, organization and her husband. And yet, we find ourselves in the middle of February, with Obama with an advantage over Clinton for those exact reasons. Obama's fundraising prowess has been nothing short of awesome, while Clinton has been so short of funds that she recently lent her campaign $5 million and now some of her staff are foregoing getting paid. Her organization has been a mess and recently she fired her campaign manager. Bill Clinton has been one of the campaign's worst liabilities with his frequent temper tantrums and otherwise bizzare pronouncements. Her shortcomings as a candidate have been obvious over the last few months- she emits a plastic and artificial persona, she is a poor speaker and her debating skills leave much to be desired. Despite all that, she still has a chance to win, although her chances rely on superdelegates and a fight over the seating of delegates from Michigan and Florida. The runup to the Democratic Coonvention should be interesting.


Shame on the House Democrats. First, yesterday they authorized hearings which investigated whether Roger Clemens took steroids while pitching in the Major Leagues. What a colossal waste of taxpayers money. Why is it Congress' business to investigate what Clemens did or did not do 10 years ago? Then, this morning the House Democrats voted to hold two Bush aides in contempt for not testifying in front of Congress. Republicans walked out of the House chamber in protest. All the while, the Democrats have refused to vote on important legislation dealing with surveillance. Its no wonder Congress' approval rating is less than that of President Bush.