Senator Clinton seems to think her "scorched earth" campaign style to get the nomination will convince voters and superdelegates she's the best person for the White House. However, it proves she's less qualified to be Commander-in-Chief more than ever.
It's 3am on April 4th 2010. President Hillary Clinton receives a phone call. The American embassy in Moscow in up in flames. A group of Russian Orthodox monks have fire-bombed the embassy with military-grade explosives. They have used Orthodox Easter [could be wrong on the date] to declare their purpose-no longer will they tolerate western missionaries praying on their flock and western influences corrupting their culture. More reports are coming in. The bodies of Evangelical and Pentecostal ministers (including children of James Dobson and Pat Robertson) are being found in the streets of Moscow, brutally mutilated. A grim CIA report has just made it to the Situation Room-these monks, with their military connections, may have gotten a hold of a nuke and smuggled it into a major American city. This is not good.
Suddenly, President Clinton is wondering "How did this happen?" A couple of months earlier, Senators Obama and Lugar wanted to talk with her about expanding their non-proliferation program. However, because of the ill-feelings she has toward the Senator (his rejection of the VP slot nearly cost her the race), she had her Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke give them lip-service. Holbrooke, however, has fallen out of grace with Clinton's people. After calling Chief of Staff Maggie Williams a c^nt, she has made sure he rarely gets to talk with the President, even on issues of grave importance (like a scheduled meeting on Russia she kept bumping). The daily national security meetings haven't gone well, either. Bill Clinton often attends them and tries to grandstand his wife. Admiral Mullen privately said "I never thought I would meet a group of people more childish than George Bush."
Of course, Clinton 44 has lost focus of foreign affairs because she has mainly been focusing on controlling her party. She is battling not just the Republicans but also the Democrats on health care. She rejected making any compromises with Senator Wyden, who had been working on a health care plan since 2007. When Democrats favoring a single-payer system met with her chief political advisor Mark Penn, they were shocked with how horrible they were treated. "In all my years in government," Congressman Kucinich wrote in an editorial in The Nation, "I have never been treated so rudely. We elected Democrats in 2008 to end these tactics, not improve on them."
The War in Iraq hasn't helped her with the liberal base. While she insists she wants to get out, President Clinton has stated she want to leave "in a manner that shows the terrorists we are not weak." The only support she has got from this position comes from Senator McCain. Overseas, she is not getting much help. Her encounter with the Spanish Prime Minister-where she called him a "cowardly pinko" when he asked the Americans not to pursue the death penalty if the Spanish extradited terror suspects to them-is one of many incidences that have led to the loss of goodwill she received on Inauguration Day. Also, terrorists have used her Islamophobic attacks on Barack Obama as a recruiting tool-stating that a society where Christians and Muslims coexists truly is a myth.
Clinton 44 watches the screen. The images of the American Embassy burning to the ground coupled with rioters screaming "For Constantinople" (referring to the 1204 sack of that city by western crusaders) leaves them with a stark reality-not only are we dealing with 1 billion Muslims that view us with suspicion but we can now add the 300 million Eastern Christians to that list. She wonders to herself-why did I fight so hard for this job?
While the scenario I presented is far-fetched, it is much less out there than the one presented from the Clinton camp-the willingness to play dirty will make you a better President. In fact, the opposite is true-a person who ruthlessly goes after their opponents make terrible leaders. Rather than building a consensus and getting major initiatives passed, they become so obsessed with defeating their adversaries they forget they were elected to actually govern.
Take a look at our current President. He was willing to go to any length to get elected (everyone remembers black babies and phony war records). When the election was over, he didn't stop campaigning. He used 9/11 as a way to get anti-union legislation passed and more Republicans into Congress (not to mention the Iraq War). When he was elected narrowly because of national security issues (and gay people), he tried to use that to get rid of Social Security. Surrounded by Rove et al., the Bush Administration has put politics over good governance.
There is evidence to assume Hillary Clinton would be even worse. At least Rove had the decency to have his shadowy attacks come from 527s and have the campaign officially denounce them. Clinton stands by even her most nasty attacks. Take this Ferraro incident. Ferraro is paid staff, not some shadowy surrogate. Not only has Clinton not fired her, her campaign has accused Obama of being the nasty ones. Not only is this hypocritical (look at how the Clintons reacted to Samantha Power), it's downright disgusting-Democrats are the party of African Americans and women, not the party of one or the other.
If Clinton gets to the White House, how will she govern? One must remember the central premise of her campaign is she will be the cool operator who has the connections to get things done. That was the premise in 2007, anyway, when she was a head. Any complaints Democrats had that she was cold, distant, aloof to their concerns could comfort themselves with the idea she was the most competent and capable to get things done-sort of a CEO president. However, when the going got tough, she was anything but competent and capable. She gets shrill and emotional. She gets angry over even the slightest remarks against her yet is willing to engage in full-blown character assassination against her opponents.
Does this mean when a Senator has some objection to a piece of legislation, she will scream at them and berate them until they agree with her? Does this mean she will treat foreign leaders with open hostility if they do not fully comply with American policy? If you look at how she has behaved on the campaign trail, it looks very much this way.
The problem with the Clintons is power has always been an end to them. Their goal has been merely to be elected. They have always thought they were saving the Democratic Party from itself. Give up on big program ideas like the New Deal or the Great Society, they've said. Trust us. We can manage a crisis. However, they have been more like a curse than a blessing to the party.
During the 1990s, the party was used to defend their exploits. At the time, Democrats were more than willing to stand up for the Clintons. The Starrs and Gingriches who were attacking them were partisan hacks who weren't fit to govern and would have slimed any Democrat. However, the Clintons were more than willing to provide ammunition. Why didn't Bill just settle with Paula Jones? Or, for that matter, why did he sleep with Monica? He knew they had used Jennifer Flowers against him. Surely he must have known they would have caught on to him.
While the Democrats were fighting for the Clintons, they were loosing their own ground. We stood by as the Republicans took control of both Houses of Congress, Governor mansions, and state legislatures. On policy issues, the Clintons largely conceded to the GOP. Big government was the problem. Cut people from welfare rolls. Forget about the infrastructure changes we campaigned on in 92. We need to win reelection!
In the 1990s, we could afford to focus more on the Clinton's latest battles than on foreign policy or the economic welfare of the country. However, given the situation we are in, we need to move beyond petty politics. The only way for Hillary Clinton to become president is to piss off the base of her party and divide the electorate. She will enter the White House without a governing coalition and things will only get worse. Simply put, America can't afford Hillary Clinton as our 44th President!!!
This is cross-blogged here
© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without
explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
Privacy Policy
Powered by Scoop.
Permalink | 5 comments