In what can only be described as George's desperate attempt to continue his disastrous, murderous, oilcentric foreign policy under a Hillary Clinton presidency, George Bush has waded into Hillary's red herring argument regarding foreign policy "experience." George Bush MUST be basing this comment on the Bill and Hillary "twofer" concept, the "co-presidency" concept, because, absent her "experience" as first lady, Hillary has exactly the same formal experience as a US senator as Obama and Edwards. Period.
President George W. Bush is endorsing Hillary Clinton's claim that she's the most experienced candidate in the 2008 field -- a plaudit that might cost her with rank-and-file Democrats.
"There is no question that Sen. Clinton understands pressure better than any of the candidates, you know, in the race," the president told ABC News Tuesday.
It wasn't clear whether the president thought Clinton was more experienced than all of the Republicans running for the White House or just Democrats. Later, he said that any of the GOP candidates could "beat" Clinton.
http://www.newsday.com/...
Laura Bush seems to indicate being first lady qualifies Hillary to be president (does this mean we can look for a Bush/Bush 2012 campaign!?):
Laura Bush chimed in during the Camp David interview, adding that Clinton's eight years as first lady might be "helpful" in her pursuit of the presidency.
To which Barack Obama replied:
"I can't tell if he's endorsing her, hoping she's the nominee or thanking her for her votes on Iraq and Iran," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.
As far as formal policy experience, as far as this canard: Hillary was sidelined under Bill Clinton after her health care debacle and served as the traditional first lady after that. There's no "there" there to her argument.
Being first lady still means that you have the president's ear as an advisor per-se but if that means you have "experience," we could and should be looking for a Laura Bush candidacy in the near future.
Already diaried? Will delete if so....