MoDo makes the case that the “new HRC” is not a distinct entity from the “old HRC”. Granted the “new HRC” is more relaxed, wiser, more mellow. To wit:
[HRC]told an Iowa Democrat, Randall Rolph, that “labeling them a terrorist organization gives us the authority to impose sanctions on their leadership. …I consider that part of a very robust diplomatic effort.”
But I recognize the woman who:
… on Sunday in New Hampton, Iowa, … lost her cool at last. Sparring with a voter on Iran, she sounded defensive and paranoid.
And so does Ms. Dowd…
If you know the dingbat vice president is agitating for a conflict with Iran, if you know that Condi is chasing after Cheney with a butterfly net on Iran and Syria, if you know you can’t believe anything this administration says, why vote to give them more backing on their dysfunctional Middle East policy?
The “new HRC” is a very careful woman when it comes to publicity; she smiles constantly for the cameras, talks in friendly platitudes , and turns the other cheek to any sign of hostility. She thought she was being the “new HRC”–at least on one level–but on another level she was the “old HRC.”
She really does remind me of Nixon in 1968.
(h/t Andrew Sullivan)