"The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity. I shall not, however, multiply professions on this head. My motives must remain in the depository of my own breast. My arguments will be open to all, and may be judged of by all. They shall at least be offered in a spirit which will not disgrace the cause of truth."
-'Publius' The Federalist No. 1
A recent post on The Right Field piqued my interest and the analogy posed. Herein, "Right Fielder' masterfully weaved an analogy between Red China and a democratic frontrunner for the presidency. In the post, 'Right Field' discussed recent restrictions upon free expression engaged by the communist government of China. Such action is necessary when the ideology of that government has been proven time and time again to be an utter failure. The government has but no choice in the least but to stifle the truth and fact from its citizens.
As 'Right Fielder' illustrates, such was the logic of Senator Hillary Clinton during her husband's decadent second term.
"When pressed for thoughts on the internet, Clinton states 'we are all going to have to rethink how we deal with' the Internet because of the handling of White House sex scandal stories on Web sites." Yet, does this not go further? The modern democratic party meanders aimlessly with no guiding light. Democrats do not have a set of core values which allows them to "triangulate" and shift their beliefs to better suit their political posturing. With the advent of such resources as MoveOn.org, does Hillary feel the same way? What were motivations for saying something so preposterous back in 1998?