Hillary Clinton unready for the unexpected
Posted on June 4th, 2007 at 8:23 am by Contributor ArchiveHillary Clinton, who has probably spent the last 10 years getting ready for her presidential run, offered a glimpse as to how unprepared she actually is for the job. At the New Hampshire debate, Clinton smugly smiled for the cameras as Barack Obama and John Edwards sparred over the war in Iraq, but Hillary lost her cool when questions strayed from the known and expected topics. While other candidates responded with answers regarding possible military use in the genocide-plagued Darfur region of Sudan, Hillary lashed out at the questioner, saying that she refused to “engage in these hypotheticals.”
As Mrs. Clinton surely knows, every white house administration (public knowledge or, much more often, not) has a planned response to just about any situation imaginable. A great amount of effort is dedicated to engaging in hypotheticals, so proper responses can be made, and gross incompetence can be avoided. Hillary, though, having not had time to conduct extensive polls of what the public would like her to say in the few seconds allotted between question and answer, refused to try to provide any kind of an honest answer.
Hopeless candidate Joe Biden, for his part, was understandably angry. Having visited Darfur recently, Biden found the genocidal activities to be something more based in reality than Hillary’s “abstract hypothetical terms” would have voters believe. Biden countered, “By the time all of these guys talk, 50,000 more people are going to be dead!”
Hillary’s inability to offer a reasonable response raises questions about how she might respond, or, more troublingly, not respond, to a crisis situation. A frontrunner in the race really should be prepared to give an answer. A president doesn’t always have the poll numbers in before some action is required.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.



I could NOT agree more. Hillary thought she was being clever with that answer, but it makes her look weak and unprepared. Reminds me of the democrats reaction to not wanting to debate on Fox. Liberals have this tendency to look hesitant and afraid.
What makes me laugh is the fact that the some of the analysts on CNN thought this was a case of Hillary showing strong leadership and distancing herself from the rest of the field.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but she did agree that we should utilize no-fly zones.
Blitzer’s question was daffy, and she wanted to point that out.
“What if Adolf Hitler came back to life, and he and Stalin teamed up and ruled China, and vampire bats overran Carlsbad, NM, and Poland declared war on El Salvador, etc.”
A hypothetical is a hypothetical. The question wasn’t designed to clarify positions, it was a trap to get the candidates to say genocide in Sudan BAD, genocide in Iraq NO BIGGIE.
Well, I think they should be able to answer that.