Hillary Clinton Would Be Awful for the Democratic Party in 2016

Clinton as Secretary of State

 

And the Republicans know it.

This post will be short.*

Clinton would be the worst possible choice for Democratic nominee in 2016. Every flaw revealed in the 2008 campaign is still there, not to be ignored in a presidential campaign. Clinton’s one plus is that much of her work as Secretary of State was good; she was part of a good governmental team. But even that work has been compromised. With moral idiocy, Clinton set up a private server for emails. While working for the United States, she used her own email account. So much for benefiting from, and reinforcing, the teamwork of respected professionals. A life in public, and she still does not understand that governmental work belongs to the people of this nation?

Keeping her emails private enabled Clinton to stockpile her writing and correspondence as SecState for future books, of course. Anything to make another few million bucks. (This point has not been made in media commentary about the emails.)

Speaking of money, one strength the Clintons undeniably have is the ability to raise millions. (The fact that I do not understand why people throw money at this unsavory pair is beside the point; they do throw money.) So the Clintons could make partial amends for their thirty years of hysterical selfishness in Arkansas, by continuing to raise money for charity. Instead, as ever with this pair, it is self uber alles. 2000 redux.

And the GOP knows it. Notice how every ‘establishment’ pundit and every GOP public figure has treated Clinton as an inevitability. The tactic kills several American birds with one stone. 1) It denies media attention to every better Democratic candidate. 2) It puts the worst possible face on the Democratic Party. 3) It ensures that most money goes to Clinton, slowing down other potential candidates. 4) It diminishes the gulf between the two major parties, foregrounding the creepy, self-engrossed Clintons and cementing the Dems more firmly to the worst of Wall Street.

The upside for Dems is that the idea of running against ‘Hillary’ has encouraged a multitude of demented candidacies for the GOP nomination. But meanwhile, the GOP has a vested interest in undoing the Obama administration as much as possible, as their only shot at position and money. Promoting ‘Hillary’ is the easiest and cheapest way to do that.

Simple point: the Clintons had thirty years in Arkansas. If they had done a good job, Hillary Clinton would have run for the Senate from Arkansas. If Bill Clinton had been the person he could have been, he would have retired to Arkansas, and been content, like Cincinnatus. But during their THIRTY YEARS in Arkansas, they did as little for working families as they could get away with doing. Their energies were focused elsewhere. And when Democratic voters wanted something better for working families, the Clintons were always there, to throw other figures under the bus, as ‘liberal’.

The ticket our establishment pundits envision in store for us is appalling. I read, but I am one voter among many who will never vote for either a Bush or a Clinton.

 

* I am working on a book that takes most of my writing time.

Elections 2014, and New York District 21 Is Looking Weird

Elections 2014, and New York District 21 Is Looking Weird

Candidates Stefanik, Woolf, and former candidate Funiciello

Okay, this is just strange. A former GWBush official is running for Congress in an upstate New York district, and polls show the race as close. Admittedly, the official in question–Elise Stefanik–was only a minor official under Bush, and New York’s 21st District does not number among those suffering worst from the invasion of Iraq. Stefanik was still in prep school at the Albany Academy for Girls when George W. Bush got the White House after the non-vote count of 2001. She was barely out of college–a Harvard grad–when she went to the Bush White House, where she worked for the Domestic Policy Council under Karl Zinsmeister and for Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten.

But the struggle continues. More recent items on the plummy resume include this kudo from her alma mater, “Elise Stefanik (SAC 2006) has joined the Foreign Policy Initiative as director of communications and external affairs.”

FPI: The new PNAC

The Foreign Policy Initiative, for those of you keeping tabs at home, is the newest avatar of the former Project for the New American Century (PNAC), long since designated as a cyberspace ghost town but in its heyday the think tank that brought us the Iraq invasion with its consequent ills. Founders and directors include Bill Kristol and the other head cases who worked feverishly, for years, to make terrorism the new communism; committed to revisiting their palmy days in the Cold War, they went the old military-industrial complex one better, by working ceaselessly to make a cold war hot. This is the leading edge young, up-and-coming GOPers want to associate themselves with?

To coin a phrase, have these people no shame?

Other items on the resume include work for 2012 presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty, where Stefanik was titled Director of New Media and Deputy Policy Director. Stefanik also founded an entity called “American Maggie,” now defunct.

But be it noted that the valid criticism here is not of small-time efforts or even of failed efforts. The criticism is of awful efforts.

The late great poet Adrienne Rich was right: amnesia in the public discourse is a continuing problem.

 

One in a series of short posts on especially soul-destroying 2014 races.