« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hillary's Moon Sets Over Puerto Rico
In a nod to Richard Dreyfuss and his charming portrait of a lovable Latin American dictator, "People of Puerto Rico, I love you." What more has Hillary Clinton left to say?
Well, maybe I shouldn't have asked that question.
In the immediate wake of the Indiana
and North Carolina primaries, I
had made this observation to my better half. "Well, there, it's finally
over. Hillary has no path to the nomination now"
"Yeah," my better half had commented dryly in return. “If it weren't
for zombie candidates who will not die."
Leave it to an artist to see things in such lovely and graphic terms...
Indeed, even in the wake of Hillary's undoing by the Rules Committee yesterday,
the attrition of her own people, and the fact that both the Michigan and
Florida Democratic Parties signed off on a compromise, making the math to Hillary’s
nomination utterly impossible, and more so, making her ongoing fight on their
behalf completely absurd, she's out there, fighting. Who knows to what bitter
end.
By the way, when Harold Ickes made his ominous threat yesterday before the
Rules Committee. "Mrs. Clinton has told me to reserve her right to take
this to the Credentials Committee at the convention," did anyone else see a
wide-eyed Barney Fife, tugging nervously at his holsters?
But I digress...
I've been wanting to say this for a long time, and in the spirit of fairness
and truth, I'm going to say it right now. Hillary, I would really love to see a
woman become President. Hell, women can run the world for the next five
thousand years for all I care. Why not? Men have mostly made a mess of it. We'd
all do well without all the pent up testosterone in the political mix.
No, it's not sexism, Hillary. My dislike for you has nothing to do with you
being a woman. I'd be disgusted with you, whether you were a woman, or a man,
or a transsexual, for that matter. You represent something I just can't stand;
a lack of moral sincerity. You started out, willing to do anything to become
President, and you've done just that, using tactics that resurrect Dick Morris
and the reprehensible tactics of triangulation your husband adopted to survive.
You know, come to think of it, a case could be made, your husband's use of
triangulation is simply George W. Bush's perpetual political campaign machine
in its incipient form.
So, here we are, the woman who put her finger to the wind going on six years
ago now, and authorized Bush's rush to war, expecting she would have to look
tough as a female candidate for President, and wanting to be on the right side
of the issue, whether she believed in invading Iraq or not. Ironically enough, Hillary
would have looked so much tougher had she voted with her conscience and not her
political head. And even more ironically, her candidacy might not have become this
bizarre, mirror image to Bush's reasons for going to war. Like Bush, when it
was clear Hillary, that you couldn't win this nominating process in a fair and
square manner, you were left to change the rules and mileposts. It's about
winning the big states, you said, no, the swing states, no, the most popular
votes, until finally, I guess, it’s about winning hearts and minds of Puerto
Rico.
Well, congratulations. It’s over now. Get real.
In the end, history will simply record that you were beaten fair and square, and by somebody who played by the rules. Had you won it on those terms, I would have voted for you in November, out of respect for the country and the Democratic Party. Come this Tuesday, I only hope you and your supporters will come to that same graceful and compassionate decision.





Comments (3)
Sexism....yes it is.
June 1, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just want to let everybody know, for historical reference, that June 1 was the day an explosion at a coal mine killed 236 in Fukuoka, Japan.
I just automatically think of June 1 as Fukuoka, Japan Coal Mine Disaster Day, in case that ever pops up in conversation and it seems inexplicable or inappropriate to you.
That's just how I remember it's June 1.
So don't freak out or make a big deal out of it if I bring it up.
June 1, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sexism...it is not.
I have voted for women before, gladly, and will again. I am represented by a woman in Congress, and one of my Senators as well. The other one, well, let's just say I hope Slimy Norman is looking for a job this winter.
It is this particular woman I will not vote for, not because of her gender, not because of her chromosomes, rather because in her recent Senate career, and in her presidential campaign, she has displayed the sort of character that I feel is ill-suited to the presidency. We have seen what division and the "50%+1" school of governing have brought us - do we really need more of it?
If she had been born male, yet with her personality, I suspect she'd be Willard Romney - and I don't much care for him either!
June 1, 2008 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment