David Shribman Oddly Stumbles Onto The Truth

RealClearPolitics has a piece up by David Shribman of the The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called Clinton & Giuliani: Each is What the Other is Not that points out that, wow, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani are very different from each other. His conclusion - that Hillary and Rudy are like fire and ice, almost literally - is correct, but the way he gets there is a bit odd. Here is the first oddity:

"the entire 2008 election is a referendum on Hillary Clinton, who isn't even president."

It's called an election, not a referendum, and yes, when a candidate has not yet been president it is entirely fair to criticize their non-presidential history. Shribman then comes up with this head-scratcher:

"Ordinarily, with an economy in confusion if not upheaval and with an unpopular war being prosecuted by an unpopular president, you might think that the election would be about the sitting president. But, apart from anti-Bush barbs tossed to the Democratic masses like pieces of raw meat, President Bush is the missing man from the 2008 contest."

He is the 'missing man' because he isn't allowed to run again in 2008. The Democrat candidates have, however, been running against President Bush - that is obvious from the debates. That is a mistake, and a mistake that Shribman thinks is good politics apparently.

Shribman then puts together a string of howlers:

They define each other. Mr. Giuliani is intuitive; Mrs. Clinton is cerebral. Giuliani is deeply emotional; Clinton is deeply rational. Giuliani has a habit of demonizing his opponents; Clinton is accustomed to being demonized.

Hillary is 'deeply rational'? We often hear such paens to Hillary's awesome intellect, but is there any proof she actually possesses above-average intelligence apart from the usual hagiographic tripe from the MSM? Shribman, by calling Giuliani 'intuitive' in comparison is attempting to call Giuliani 'irrational', especially compared to the human computer that is Hillary Clinton. Shribman should know that no one becomes a highly successful federal prosecutor without a very high intelligence quotient. My guess is that Hillary does not possess the brain power to do that job.

As for Giuliani demonizing his opponents . . . that has been true, but Hillary, the think-skinned Queen of Smashmouth Politics is far more adept at dishing it out than taking it. She is hardly a victimized naif in this department.

3 comments:

Zsa Zsa said...

Hillary and Leona Helmsly remind me of one another! Really...

Ken McCracken said...

LOL I never thought of that comparison.

John said...

Yet another attempt by the MSM to portray the Democratic candidate as the "smart" option and the Republican candidate as the "dumb" option. See also Bush v.Gore & Kerry and Reagan v. Carter & Dukakis.