Hillary Clinton’s Hide and Seek

14 Mar

Hillary Clinton has been playing hide and seek throughout this campaign.  Today Senator Orrin Hatch found her crouched behind a facade of words in the health care discussion.

Hillaryclinton.com states: 

“Nobody has worked harder or longer to improve health care than Hillary Clinton. From her time in Arkansas when she improved rural health care to her successful effort to create the SCHIP Children’s Health Insurance program which now covers six million children, Hillary has the strength and experience to ensure that every man, woman and child in America has quality, affordable health care.”

However, in today’s Boston Globe the co-author of the amendment that created SHCIP, Senator Orrin Hatch, said:

“We all care about children. But does she deserve credit for SCHIP?  No–Teddy (Kennedy) does, but she doesn’t.”

There are those that acknowledge that Hillary may have done some behind the scenes lobbying for SCHIP.  However, to call that a “successful effort to create the SCHIP Children’s Health Insurance Program” is to stretch the truth from Pasadena to Pluto.  Hopefully, someone in the Obama camp will point this out to voters in Pennsylvania and perhaps even Michigan, should the chance arise.  

Of course, documents and records that could enlighten voters on the actual roles Hillary Clinton played as First Lady remain under review by the Bill Clinton Library Archives.  How convenient.  Could it be that while Hillary gives the impression that she was politicking side-by-side with her husband, she was actually writing guest lists and planning menus?  It probably doesn’t matter.  For in the phraseology of the Clinton campaign, if Hillary were choosing China patterns for a state dinner, she would have actually been “developing avenues of international trade.” 

As readers of The Hangover know, language can be a dangerous thing. 


10 Responses to “Hillary Clinton’s Hide and Seek”

  1. Chilly Nate March 15, 2008 at 11:44 am #

    Reason #647 to vote Republican.

  2. aaron, of course March 17, 2008 at 4:15 pm #

    Hillary plays “Hide and Seek’ while Obama just hides, although he has been forced to the surface over the last few days because of some things his pastor and religious advisor of over 20 years has said about our Great Country and the Great People who comprise it.

    ‘God d*mn America’ and ‘ameri-KKK-a.’ Those words are difficult to type and painful to see and hear, at least for some people.

    Reason #1 to vote Republican- You’ll never hear anyone you voted for asking God to damn you or your Country, and your candidate will never support anyone who utters such vile nonsense. Neither your candidate nor his or her spouse will ever say that they have never been proud of their Country. Neither your candidate nor anyone he or she knows, is associated with, donates $$ to etc. will ever bastardize the beautiful name of your Country in an effort to make it fowl and offensive and pornographic.

  3. alguschip March 17, 2008 at 7:21 pm #

    I’d rather have a President who goes to a church where the Pastor said, “God damn America,” than a president who doesn’t believe in evolution and does believe God talks to him about America.

  4. aaron, of course March 17, 2008 at 7:49 pm #

    Hey Al! Which of the current contenders to be our next President has indicated either of those views?

    Now, when you say ‘evolution’ I am assuming you mean Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, the same THEORY which was thought up before we had color photography, cars, airplanes, telephones, microscopes that could see inside a cell, space travel, television, computers and so much more! Hhhhmmmm….(This should be FUN!)Name 1 distinct and seperate species that has evolved from another, and your proof. Could this be a topic for a new blog?

  5. alguschip March 17, 2008 at 9:12 pm #

    Aaron, of course, that would be our current President. It’s been a long time since I’ve read “Origin of the Species,” but I look forward to reading your blog “Ignoring Science 101.”

  6. Chilly Nate March 18, 2008 at 2:25 pm #

    And he said to his wife and children as they left him behind on their way to church on a beautiful Sunday morning in Kennebunkport Maine, the North Atlantic Coast of The United States of America, “I’d rather have a President who goes to a church where the Pastor said, “God damn America,” than a president who doesn’t believe in evolution and does believe God talks to him about America.”
    That’s just fucked up Al.

  7. aaron, of course March 18, 2008 at 2:34 pm #

    Alguschip. Obama ain’t runnin’ against W.

    Maybe I’ll name that entry, ‘Opening Up My Eyes to Science: A Modern Day View to an Outdated and Impossible Theory.’

    …but I noticed you didn’t/couldn’t answer my question…

    Luv Ya Bro!!!

  8. alguschip March 18, 2008 at 6:47 pm #

    Aaron, of course that question was so obivous I assumed it was rhetorical. How about this one: Man from apes.
    If you are unsure of how that worked I recommned this site:

  9. aaron, of course March 18, 2008 at 9:13 pm #

    I hear you, Big Al. You know me, I’m just a regular guy despite my devilish good looks. I went through school and got regular doses of the state carriculum, but there was always 1 nagging question that I never really got a satisfactory answer to. That’s because DTE (Dar Theo Evo)CAN’T answer it. How can you make life from non-life? Forget the bull-crap about a murky pond being struck by lightning and giving rise to ‘simple’ single celled organisms. It’s an impossibility in the known universe, otherwise we’d see evidence of it everywhere we looked.

    Man from Apes is another stickler. Unlike waaaaaay back in Darwin’s time, we now know that in order for a species to ‘change’ into another species, it’s DNA must change, and that’s a physical impossibility. DNA cannot change to give rise to a new species, even though it is possible for recessive qualities to be present which allow for adaptations WITHIN a species (i.e. brown hair vs. red hair, etc). In fact, the body has safeguards which actually work to prevent changes to DNA by patching parts of DNA strands which could possibly lead to mutations from the original.

    The more I read and studied, the more I realized that I had been completely hoodwinked into believing an impossibility. Once you don;t mind being called names, especially by yourself, the conclusion is quite easy to accept. I just don’t believe I didn’t reach it earlier.

    Unfortunately, any discussion along these lines ends up being framed as ‘Darwinism vs. Creationism’, and that prevents the discovery of the real how and why. Or does it?

    This just might be the topic of my first blog.



    How do you creat links? I must not be evolved enough! LOL

  10. george in the sticks March 20, 2008 at 10:58 pm #

    As an educator, I feel it is my job to address some of the mistatements on evolution. As an educator in Kansas, I feel it is my mission. I read through the two sites listed and the first strikes me as an intelligent design argument, which seeks to cover the religious intent with scientific discussion. The second makes no pretense of keeping the discussion on the scientific level. For those interested, I suggest _God, the Devil and Darwin_ in which my colleague Niall Shanks takes on the Intelligent design argument on its own merits. He addresses many of the attempts to refute Darwin that are posted on the website, including many of the authors cited as support for intelligent design. My area of research is diseases in history so I will make two brief examples to illustrate the Darwinian notion of survival of the fittest which is predicated on genetic mutation. First, the evolution of antibiotic resistant bacteria clearly illustrates the process. Mutations that created survival benefits in an antibiotic environment result in a new strain of bacteria that thrives in the artifically created vacant niche. It is correct to argue this is a result of RNA mutations, but that merely increases the rate of mutation (combined with the short reproductive cycle of bacteria) to speed up the process. DNA errors occur also, just not as rapidly because of the “fact checking” component of replication. Just as spell check doesn’t catch every error, nor does DNA replication prevent errors. For a simple example we need look no further than sickle cell anemia. This is a mutation in the genetic code that causes the redblood cell to develop in a sickle shape rather than the donut (mmm donuts) shape of a normal red blood cell. One copy of the genetic defect limits the ability of falciparum malaria to infect red blood cells ( a crucial stage in the reproductive cycle of the illness). Two copies (one from each parent) results in a painful, fatal affliction. The defect or mutation persists in populations where it offers a competive advantage, namely in regions where falciparum malaria is endemic (in constant circulation). In regions where that strain of malaria is not endemic, nature selects it out because it offers no competive advantage in other regions. Falciparum malaria kills, in endemic regions usually children, hence the mutation is an advantage. In non-endiemic regions the mutation kills (two copies of the mutation) so over time, nature selects it out because it is a competitive disadvantage. The key to both examples is time. We can see the evolutionary changes in bacteria because it happens faster, almost in real time. We have a hard time seeing human mutations because the time of change is so much longer. But geneticists have evidence that sickle cell mutation fades in populations removed from falciparum endemic regions. I encourage those interested in a refutation of intelligent design criticisms to check out the works of those who deal with their arguments head on, as in Shanks’s book.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: