Sunday, August 12, 2007

Hillary Clinton? Not a Fan

Latest Newspaper Column:

Readers of this column occasionally ask me, "So when are you going to write about Hillary Clinton?"

It's often delivered with a smirk, as if the person believes that I'm too much of a Clinton supporter ever to say anything mean or nasty about the junior senator from New York. This has always puzzled me somewhat, as I'm really not a big Hillary Clinton fan.

Admittedly, it may sometimes seem as if I'm leaping to her defense. Take for example the recent flap over, God help us, Clinton's cleavage.

In a recent appearance on the Senate floor, The Washington Post reported breathlessly, "[Clinton] was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. ... There it was. Undeniable."

It goes on like this, paragraph after paragraph of sheer raving stupidity. And of course, the so-called "liberal" media picked it up, with story after story discussing the senatorial bust line until you'd have thought that Hillary had done a pole dance on the Senate floor. It was one of the most moronic things I've seen from the American media since the John Edwards haircut fracas.

But calling these so-called "journalists" morons doesn't mean I'm pro-Hillary. It means I'm anti-moron.

I also don't buy the "Oh, she'll never win. No one likes her." This has become an especially strange thing to say since she became the frontrunner and the largest money-raiser. It sort of reminds me of the famous Yogi Berra quote, "No one goes there anymore; it's too crowded."

Still, as I've said, I'm not a fan. So here are my reasons not to vote for Hillary Clinton:

First off, there's the whole dynasty thing. I'm really not comfortable with the history of the United States presidency for 27 solid years reading Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. We need some new names in the White House.

Then there's her campaign theme song. I thought the online contest to pick the song was kind of a cute idea, and she pulled it off with some nice self-deprecating humor. She had some great tunes to choose from, like Jesus Jones' "Right Here Right Now" and the Temptations' "Get Ready." And after all that, she chose a song by Celine Dion? Celine Dion is Canadian, for crying out loud. And she, you know, sucks.

And that's a symptom of what really bugs me about Hillary. She always takes what looks like the safe choice. She always goes toward where she thinks the middle of the road is. From their early cheerleading for the Iraq War to her support for the misnamed, anti-freedom "Patriot Act," Clinton and her cronies in the Democratic Leadership Conference keep trying to turn the Democrats into Republican Lite.

Here's a news flash, senator: It. Doesn't. Work.

The wingnuts don't care how many times you voted to send American troops into Iraq, or how many bills you co-sponsor to criminalize flag-burning, or how many hearings you have about racy TV or violent video games. You're still a dirty socialist hippie in their eyes and you always will be. Actual liberals hate you for stabbing them in the back, and centrists think you don't have any principles and will do anything to get elected.

But the Washington pundits say you can't appear "too liberal" or the American people won't love you. (You know the pundits I mean. The ones who were so right about WMDs in Iraq.) The middle of the road, they say, is the place to be. The problem with this is, they don't realize how far the so-called "middle of the road" has moved.

You say supporting national health insurance is "too liberal"? In a CNN poll taken in May, a whopping 64 percent of those polled said "yes" to the question, "Do you think the government should provide a national health insurance program for all Americans, even if this would require higher taxes?"

You say distaste for George Dubbya Bush and his corrupt cronies is "too liberal"? Do the words "25 percent approval rating" strike a familiar note?

You say wanting the troops out of Iraq immediately is "too liberal"? Well, 59 percent of respondents told an ABC News/Washington Post poll that, and I quote, "the United States should withdraw its military forces from Iraq in order to avoid further U.S. military casualties, even if that means civil order is not restored there."

Sen. Clinton and the "middle of the road" crowd don't seem to understand this simple fact: The majority of us are dirty socialist hippies these days. And unless she gets that, I'm not voting for Hillary.

At least in the primary.

13 comments:

Joanie said...

I agree. But who ARE you going to vote for?

JD Rhoades said...

Probably Obama, if for no other reason than his speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention:

Alongside our famous individualism, there’s another ingredient in the American saga, a belief that we’re all connected as one people. If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. If there is a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and having to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandparent. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties.

It is that fundamental belief -- It is that fundamental belief: I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper that makes this country work. It’s what allows us to pursue our individual dreams and yet still come together as one American family...


The pundits, the pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them, too. We worship an "awesome God" in the Blue States, and we don’t like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we’ve got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.

In the end -- In the end -- In the end, that’s what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or do we participate in a politics of hope?


I watched that and thought, "why the hell isn't THIS guy the candidate?"

Joanie said...

I remember that speech. Had the same thought at the time. But then I looked at his books and they seem so fluffy. I just don't know.

Anonymous said...

I have read both of Obama's books and am in awe of him. After 27 years of reheated leftovers, he is a refreshing alternative. As a Texan, (like the Dixie Chicks) I find George Dubya Shrub an embarrassment, not only to Texas, but to the whole country. I am a little surprised, however, that as a fellow Carolina attorney, J.D. is not for John Edwards. Your thoughts on that, J.D.?

nathan said...

Obama is my dude. He's had some slip-ups of late (a few that really bothered me), but across the board he is exactly what I think this country needs right now if we ever hope to pull ourselves out of the gigantic mess (and not jut the wars) that BushINC. have created.

Anonymous said...

Sorry 'bout the previous anonymous post, but as a certified senior, I've yet to completely master the mysteries of the internet. Molly Ivens, bless her recently departed soul, was the first to nickname George W. as Shrub, and it was Newt Grinrich (sp) that made the recent quote 'bout the war on terror. Take care, J.D.,.....
Don Bernhard

suzilem said...

eh....

Reluctantly, I agree with you, and I'm probably going to vote for Obama in the primary. Just one quibble....if you're going to talk dynasty, please give her the full eight years for 32 instead of 27 (unless you're preparing for the ugly possibility that Jeb will take center stage after the four year Hillary interregnum).

Anonymous said...

I think it's too early for Obama. I don't think he's ready to juggle domestic, plus foreign policy. And, yes, I thought his speech was great, Dusty, and had similar thoughts (come on, he was running for president the night he gave his speech). I think he's going to flame out (if Edwards doesn't first). He's going to make a number of mistakes and because Hillary is in this to win, it's gonna get very vicious and nasty.

I don't want another Clinton. Please.

The next two presidents will have to get us out of Iraq, Iran, etc. and focus on our domestic problems. I just don't see a viable candidate. Yet. I voted for a Dem presidential candidate only one time - for Kerry - and apparently I was the only one (and Repub since birth) who had. I have no problem voting Dem, but neither Hillary or Obama right now.

I have NJ in-laws this week and it should be interesting to hear their take on Edwards, my neighbor four miles down the road.

Jeanne

JD Rhoades said...

Don: I'd be just as happy with Edwards, I think. An Edwards/Obama ticket would be just the thing.

Anonymous said...

I agree, J.D. I believe that Obama would settle for VP. Even Edwards would, possibly. Hillary, nope, it will be the top spot only for her. It's a shame that Maggie won't allow this kind of discussion on her forum. :)
Don

JD Rhoades said...

It's a shame that Maggie won't allow this kind of discussion on her forum. :)

Doesn't bother me...it's there for a different purpose.

Rob said...

I'll probably be voting for Gore.

Anonymous said...

You're right, J.D., Maggie's forum adequately serves another purpose. As for current political news, there's good news and bad news.

The good: Karl Rove's leaving.

The bad: He's settling in the Texas Hill Country in the Kerrville/Ingram area, my old home town. Thank God, the long time Bernhard's Lockers in Ingram sold and no longer bears my family's name.
Don