It was only six months ago that Hillary was attacking George Bush for waging his "war on science". It was only six months ago that Hillary was saying that she would shield science from politics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/us/politics/05clinton.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=sloginToday, it appears that she has changed her stance on that:
“I’m not going to put in my lot with economists,” she said on ABC’s “This Week” program. A few moments later, she added, “Elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantages the vast majority of Americans.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5809228&mesg_id=5809228By pushing for this incredibily wrong-headed proposal she is both ignoring and attacking every economist in the scientific community that has rightly come out against it. By branding the opinion of these economists as "elitist" she is in fact waging war on them, on science.
In the NY Times article I'd cited above she did mention her believe in evolution:
“I believe in evolution, and I am shocked at some of the things that people in public life have been saying,” Mrs. Clinton said in the interview.
“I am grateful that I have the ability to look at dinosaur bones and draw my own conclusions,” she added, saying, too, that antibiotic-resistant bacteria is evidence that “evolution is going on as we speak.”
It's unfortunate that when this campaign is over, and we're able to observe the bones of Hillary's failed campaign, we will have concluded, just as Hillary had, that, "evolution is going on as we speak." We will have observed that Hillary Clinton had evolved, ever so slowing, towards a being more like George Bush, than like Democrat.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
