I woke up this morning thinking about my post from last night called Hillary Will Be the Next Muskie. Why, I wondered, am I so hostile to the idea of Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee in 2008?
The answer, I think, is that I have spent every day of the last two years, almost without exception, reading all the political news that I can get my eyes on. I have been totally immersed in the battle against Bushism. And I have a very keenly honed sense of who my allies are and who has been on my right flank, who has been on my left flank, and who has been waiting in reserve. And Hillary Clinton has been AWOL. She has not shown up. In fact, some of her most important allies…people like James Carville and Paul Begala…have been running interference.
The netroots movement emerged precisely because the most powerful elements in the Democratic Party and the ‘liberal’ press were not opposed to invading Iraq on the President’s whim and did nothing to support those that knew this war would be a costly and demoralizing disaster. Howard Dean captured the spirit of the people that had actual predictive capabilities and a moral compass. Meanwhile, ostensibly liberal columnists like Tom Friedman and Richard Cohen thought invading Iraq would bring democracy to the Middle East and peace to Israel.
We couldn’t rely on our ‘friends’ in the press and we couldn’t rely on our representatives in Congress. I know who my allies have been. We’ve had no greater ally in the Senate than Russ Feingold. In the House, we’ve had allies in John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Henry Waxman and a couple dozen others.
Pro-war candidates like Harold Ford Jr., Joe Lieberman, Rick Santorum, George Allen, Mike DeWine, Conrad Burns, J.D. Hayworth have been punished. Pro-war journalists like William Safire and Judith Miller are no longer employed. But, in all this time and throughout this long battle, Hillary and her agents have been nowhere to be seen along the lines of battle.
It is way too late for her to find religion.
When Paul Begala says stuff like the following, I take it as a personal affront from Hillary (fair or not fair):
Yes, [Dean’s] in trouble, in that campaign managers, candidates, are really angry with him. He has raised $74 million and spent $64 million. He says it’s a long-term strategy. But what he has spent it on, apparently, is just hiring a bunch of staff people to wander around Utah and Mississippi and pick their nose. That’s not how you build a party. You win elections. That’s how you build a party.”
– Paul Begala on Howard Dean and the DNC’s 50 State Strategy.
“Look,” [Begala] said, “When we started there were only about 15 competitive races, but Rahm made the field over 35 by the end and that had nothing to do with the 50-state strategy.” I told him we never would have had so many competitive districts if not for the DNC investing staffers and resources into those states early on and expanding the playing field. “So you have people out there, what are they doing there though?” he questioned. ” I told him they were building a long term infrastructure for the Democratic Party, and we had people all over America knocking on doors and spreading the Democratic message. “So what do they say when they knock on the doors then?” he asked me. I told him they had a succinct 6 point plan for a “new direction” that they were discussing, a cohesive message that we haven’t had in the past. “Anyway,” Begala continued… “I don’t need some a**hole from Vermont telling me what to do.”
I don’t need to be insulted by Hillary’s campaign. It’s one thing not to fight…to leave all the fighting to our soldiers in Iraq and left-wing bloggers here at home. It’s quite another to go around calling us all ineffectual a**holes and giving all the credit for the midterms to Rahm Emanuel. If you want to know why I don’t want Hillary, it’s because she runs a gang of thugs that think we are the enemy and she hasn’t been fighting for us. Why would I ever trust her to fight for us once she’s back in the White House? I’m looking for alternatives.
Hillary is nothing more than Repugnant Lite.
or as in depth as you do, but what strikes me is that I cannot offhandedly recall any thing that Hillary stands for. (OK, health care, but that was a long time ago…)
I mean, I know of Edwards’ two Americas theme. I know of Obama’s stance on the war and some of his social stuff, but other than wanting the White House for personal reasons, what is she proposing to bring to the table?
Full disclosure: I’m not committed yet, but I like Edwards. I like Obama also, but am not sure yet if it’s just an infatuation.
As far as I can tell, she stand for Clintonism. She hasn’t differentiated herself from her husband an iota. Now, Clintonism isn’t all bad, but the last time we gave them power and a Democratic Congress, they promptly lost it.
Should Hillary take the Dem nomination, she’ll not win and we’ll have President Giuliani with the WH firmly in GOP hands. Rudy will take it as McCain is slipping badly…not trusted
Now Rudy is no better than Bush with cronyism and civil liberties but given the likely choice as it now sets up
I can’t see a Hillary win against Rudy.
’08 is still a long way to go and Rudy is the one to watch.
Her plan was not a single-payer plan, which is the only sensible alternative. Her plan was the result of the big insurance companies outlobbying smaller insurance companies. The smaller ones would disappear, but there would still be the waste and inefficiency of having several large insurance companies.
I just sent this to my friend with whom I was having the Hillary argument last week. Thanks for saying it way better than I could.
thanks. you gave me the idea to send this to my sister. She is not a hillary fan but, I thought she’d like to see why I hate Hillary.
this just points up to how so many of us feel.
Absolutely, Boo. You are not alone.
That’s a good way to frame Hillary Boo. She has definitely been awol on any real solution about Iraq or bringing the troops home. Her statements over the weekend about how she’d bring the troops home if she is president is pretty lame..here’s a novel idea Hil..take a stand and do something right now to help bring our troops home like getting behind a no funding bill.
Her big plan-so far anyway-on her web site for ending our dependence on oil is to make oil companies use some of their profits to look for alternative fuels etc…wow how detailed is that ..not. How bout a real plan-lay out specifics, we already have the technology for alternative fuels or even gasp bring back the electric car, pass a bill that cars have to get 40 damn mpg..anything but the lame ‘plan’ for oil companies to do more research.
We already know she has no health care plan that’s worth a damn. Besides that her biggest donors right now I believe are the medical insurance companies..
I’m sure she’ll throw gay people under the bus and at this point I wouldn’t doubt she’d throw roe/wade under the bus for some of those good old religious votes.
Pick any issue and like Boo said-she’s awol. We could even say that she’s all hat and no cattle.
I like what you said, Boo. I do think that she is all hat and no cattle like CI said. I have always said we do not need a dynasty in the WH ever! If she got elected, then that would mean we would have another bush after her. I think I would die if that should happen.
Yup, she has not one thing out on the market that is new and she is nothing but hot air and I do nto even know her. As far as her group of ppl with her, I wonder…We haven’t heard from Peter Daou (sp) from Salon, now have we. He was supposed to be the biggest thing next to chocolate for her group. Oh well the others are just all smoke and mirrors as far as I am concerned. Anyone connected with the DLC is not not good for democrats,, and that is who I hang with anyhow. She seems like the same old shit nothing new just regurgatate it over and over again till it catches on.
I do not want a dyanasty in the house that we own….no sir indeed!
I, too, am very angry towards the possibility of Hillary. I have a very negative reaction to her.
She is not a democrat in my eyes. she embodies none of the ideas and positions of the great dems like FDR or Kennedy. She is very much a moderate repug like Leiberman.
I also dislike her style of politics. That so inside the beltway, corporate DLC way. Pandering, triagulation, whining, and blaming everyone else for her mistakes. I was watching the sunday talk shows and they showed a clip of Hillary not accepting the wrongness of Iraq but, instead whining that Bush did it wrong. It doesn’t matter if Bush did it wrong. Quit whining and blaming instead of being an adult. You voted to give him the power to conduct war is need be. You knew what you were voting for. You knew if you gave him a yes he would use it. Instead of leadership she looks for blame and today hoped to bounce the criticism off by talking Iran…
It was a blatant attempt again at pandering and deflecting.
Her politics are of the old school. The school of the 80s when baby boomers blamed the world and people should think about the me.
There is no authentic, no owning up, no honesty. Just the same bullcrap we have had only in a very obvious way.
If there was anything I could do to destroy her attempts to smear the other candidates and stop her from getting the nomination, I would sign on.
She would be more of the same and a disaster for this country when we need an FDR again.
Pardon my coarseness. Hillary is scum.
Talk about flippy floppyness!
She’s a Davos/DLC/Corporatist=Fascist.
Edwards, Obama, Kucinich, Dodd, et al., but not another Clinton/Bush.