An AP report begins:
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said Wednesday a Hillary Rodham Clinton presidency would be a step back to the past, turning her husband's image of a bridge to the future against her. ...Further along the AP says:
In his speech, Obama depicted Clinton as a calculating, poll-tested divisive figure who will only inspire greater partisan divisions as she sides with Republicans on issues such as trade, the role of lobbyists in politics and national security.The entire AP report is here.
I couldn’t find any place in the story where Sen. Obama is actually quoted as saying Hillary is “divisive.”
How a public figure uses “divisive” when referring to another public figure is very important.
We’ve gone years now listening to Dem leaders and their MSM news flacks calling President Bush “divisive.” They use "divisive" as a pejorative term. .
They count on the public not to remember that every great American president and public leader has been divisive, sometimes very deliberately so.
Lincoln knew many of his policies could help bring on a civil war, but he pursued them in what he felt was the country’s best long-term interest.
FDR knew his request just months before Pearl Harbor for legislation to extend the service time of Army draftees would divide the Congress and country. He was right. The legislation passed the House by one vote after much bitter debate and a national outcry to “let the boys come home.”
Public figures, journalists and news organizations have used “divisive” as a pejorative term to attack President Bush and gain some partisan advantage.
Calling policy proposals and judicial nominations “divisive” has also become a way of sliming them and a cover for not giving them a fair hearing.
I hope Obama, who’s promising us change, is not going to go the route of sliming his opponents as ‘divisive.”
Obama should confront Hillary on the issues. If he does call her “divisive,” it ought to be because he can make the case that she is needlessly divisive.