Hillary “Handled” The Hostage Situation?
December 2nd, 2007 at 07:15pm Matt Margolis
The other night I caught a segment on FOX News where there was discussion about the hostage situation that occurred at the Hillary Clinton headquarters in Rochester, NH. It seems like there’s a lot of talk about “how Hillary handled the situation.” I’m sure I don’t need to remind you about the ridiculous puff piece written by Glen Johnson for the AP, but clearly much of the discussion reflects sentiments implied by that piece.
Hillary and her campaign clearly saw the political opportunities from the hostage situation at her campaign HQ, but, we shouldn’t forget that there was absolutely nothing Hillary had to handle. She wasn’t at the headquarters when it happened. She was never in danger at any point. She also had no authority over local law enforcement, thus she was never in a position to make any decisions that affected the outcome of the hostage situation. It was never a test of her leadership abilities, and not once was she in a position to demonstrate her capacities to handle a crisis situation. Instead, it showed her ability to see the political impact of a situation and how to exploit it.
That being said, one can’t ignore that there is certainly going to be a short-term political advantage for Hillary as a result. Some theorized that, with regards to her recent slide in the polls after her terrible performance at the Philly debate, this event combined the subsequent “presidential-looking Hillary” media coverage, should “stop the bleeding.” I wouldn’t doubt that it may do that, but there’s no reason why it should.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats
14 Comments
1. Gozer the Carpathian | December 2nd, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Honestly I can’t fault her for taking advantage of the situation. I’m pretty sure any politician in a similar situation would have done the same.
Sat back, let the police do their job, and be happy and relieved when nothing bad happened.
I do get a bit annoyed that folks would think this proves how well she handles a crisis or takes charge. Because it’s nothing of the sort. I applaud the police on the scene and the emergency personell involved because that is where all the credit is due.
2. hermie | December 2nd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Taking advantage meant getting in the way of those who had to make the life or death decisions. By her own admission she kept hounding the police and NH authorities. That meant they had to placate the junior Senator from NY, and couldn’t devote all their energies into ending the crisis.
What if it turned out badly? Would she have taken the blame for that as easily as she took the credit for it ending well?
3. rubbersoul | December 2nd, 2007 at 9:15 pm
You guys would have criticized her no matter how it turned out. She could have “handled” it or “not-handled” it. What, if ya don’t mind me asking, is the fine line she could have struck to garner your respect? If the answer is none, then why are we having this conversation?
4. Mark Noonan | December 2nd, 2007 at 9:17 pm
rubbersoul,
To have issued a statment thanking God that no one was hurt and praising law enforcement and then never mention it again, as its irrelevant to her campaign…that is what good manners would have dicated.
5. rubbersoul | December 2nd, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Mark,
Has she mentioned it again?
6. Dittohead4Life | December 2nd, 2007 at 11:05 pm
What, if ya don’t mind me asking, is the fine line she could have struck to garner your respect?
There is no fine line with this lying beyotch.
If the answer is none, then why are we having this conversation?
You’re right; we shouldn’t be having the conversation. Go away, asshat…
7. phnx | December 2nd, 2007 at 11:54 pm
“Has she mentioned it again?”
ahhhhh yeah!!!!
She’s planning to visit Rochester and hold a press conference with the obligatory photo ops.
She’s gonna milk this for all its worth to try and reverse her flagging poll numbers.
8. John Nickelsen | December 3rd, 2007 at 12:00 am
The hostage situation gave Hillary a chance to play president. It gave her a chance to play victim. No more no less.
9. Dittohead4Life | December 3rd, 2007 at 5:34 am
The hostage situation gave Hillary a chance to play president. It gave her a chance to play victim. No more no less.
It gave her a chance to pander to one of her constituencies–Hollywood. What an act she is; once she leaves politics, she’ll have a career on the big screen, right alongside the rest of the phonies…
10. Jon Parker | December 3rd, 2007 at 8:44 am
While I agree that Hillary didn’t handle the situation, she has never claimed to.
Meanwhile, the GOP has a guy running for president who claims to have “handled” 9-11 in much the same way.
11. neocon | December 3rd, 2007 at 8:48 am
Jon,
You’re comparing Hillarys role in the staged hostage crisis to Rudys role in NY and 9/11?
That’s priceless.
12. Jon Parker | December 3rd, 2007 at 10:33 am
“Staged” hostage crisis? My god, there is no end to your delusions.
And of course I’m not comparing Hillary’s role to Rudy’s. As far as I know, Hillary didn’t actually do anything that exacerbated the situation, like building a command center in a building that had already been attacked by terrorists or failing to ensure that police and firefighters could communicate.
13. neocon | December 3rd, 2007 at 10:43 am
You’re right Jon, Rudy personally disabled the communication devices between the Firefighters and police. That wasn’t a problem that was systemic, just an attempt by Rudy further exasperate the problem.
And “staged” was used satirically, but I can only imagine the sheer fright of being held hostage with from a meekly, overweight dropout with a road flare.
And since everything else is staged in her campaign from questions to retired military generals, I wouldn’t put it past them to stage this.
14. Jon Parker | December 3rd, 2007 at 12:47 pm
It’s a big step from “failing to ensure” to “personally disabled.” It was a known problem, and Rudy didn’t address it.
And yes, being held hostage is frightening. It’s happened to me before. Not that Hillary was one of those being held hostage, so I’m not sure what that has to do with anything.
Political campaigns stage events all the time. It’s practically the definition of a campaign. Our Dear Leader is notorious for refusing to allow hard questions at events that he attends. But suggesting that a hostage situation was staged as a campaign event (which you say you do “satirically” but then take back with “”I wouldn’t put it past them”) without a single shred of evidence is beyond ridiculous. Face it, you got nothing.