I must admit I was happy and didn't pay much attention to politics during the Clinton years. I remember having one argument (mild) with another liberal about Cuba but don't remember what the issue was. They were either for or against the embargo, I think I was against it.
There are two things about the Clinton Democratic agenda that I wonder about.
One is the lunatic in charge of the DCCC who is a great fundraiser but manages to tick everyone off and who operates with a slash and burn mentality. I am pleased that Pelosi did not give Emanuel the job he wanted--I don't support rewarding bullies no matter which party they belong to. If it wasn't for Howard Dean, we would not be where we are today, and Senator Webb would not have stepped up last night as the greatest Democratic leader we've seen in a long time.
Second, James Carville is either a spy, or the Clinton Democrats are Republicans in sheep's clothing. That man gives key campaign information directly to the Republicans through his highly connected Republican wife. Who needs enemies when you've got friends who leak your strategies?
The fact that Hillary Clinton has hired James Carville for her inner circle makes me think that A) She will lose because he'll sell her out, or B) She is really a Republican in sheep's clothing.
I wasn't ready to rule her out as my Presidential candidate until she hired James Carville.
What's ironic is that the Clinton years seemed good for nearly everybody, and they actually tried to get healthcare coverage for us, but our government and our corporations have spun out of control and I think the Clinton's helped rather than hindered that direction. So maybe the Clintons are really Republicans-lite, as in "Let's let the rich rob the poor here and abroad while we support social programs (except welfare) and look like we're gunning for healthcare." Hardly progressive. Perhaps the right wing was hating that which was most similar to them, but not them (now that I think about that, that actually rings true with the personal morality issues!).
So now Howard Dean is campaigning for the DNC's war chest for whoever the Democratic nominee may be. There are a few good men running, and I suspect more will join. I wonder if this has traditionally been the DNC tactic, or if Emmanuel wants that money to run Hillary (I don't think she needs it). It really speaks volumes to me that Clinton has raised so much MONEY. The wealthy like her, very, very much. Someone should ask her if she supports publically funded campaigns!!
I know I'm not the first to observe this about the Clintons, I just wondered what any readers thoughts might be on this!
2 comments:
Power is the first principle. HRC's job is to win. That was JFK II's job in 2004, but he couldn't even beat the worse president in history. The best thing you can say about HRC's candidacy, is that Democrats may not have to blow their war chest in the primaries. But I still won't vote for her until the general election.
I'm going to write to $Hillary and ask for her position on how we can create publically funded campaigns so that our government officials will represent people more than property.
Post a Comment