Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Kathleen Sebelius: My Guilty Reasoning

avatar

I've been advocating Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius for VP for a while now.

Part of the reasoning behind Sebelius is that she is well-qualified. She has served in elected office for 22 years. She served in the Kansas House of Representatives for 8 years. She then stood up to Blue-Cross Blue-Shield as Kansas Insurance Commissioner by blocking their attempts to buy up insurance carriers in Kansas. She served in that capacity for 8 years. As governor she eliminated a $1.1 billion debt without raising taxes.

Now I must admit the more nefarious and, to my mind, less idealistic reason why I favor Sebelius. It boils down to: I don't like Hillary Clinton.

Hillary is a power unto herself, that is undeniable. She represented roughly half the party. She also, in my opinion, has the remarkable ability to make her most diehard supporters just ignore her constant dishonesty and the constant racial references she, her husband, and her associates kept throwing around(hint: start with Bill Shaheen and "Is Obama A Drug Dealer?" and it's a long long timeline of covert race-baiting that culminated in the overt race-baiting of Geraldine Ferraro). She has the ability to have her top surrogate, Mark Penn, deem half of this nation as "insignificant" day-after-day memo after memo to the point of parody, and then pivot to comparing the self-inflicted Michigan and Florida debacles to Selma, Seneca Falls, and Zimbabwe. Her top surrogates bashed and insulted every state she didn't win, calling Iowa nothing but a mayor's race, implying that South Carolina was insignificant because the black guy always wins South Carolina, suing to stop the at-large precincts in Nevada. And can we all agree that whatever the independent merits of both Florida and Michigan's cases, the Clinton position was highly disingenuous and hypocritical given that they agreed with the original position of the RBC(I think they were given a gift, myself).

There were moments during the primary where I agreed with Peggy Noonan when she likened Hillary to "a political Rasputin", a miserable creature that haunts the Earth with its malice, refusing through bulletwounds and multiple glasses of cyanide and blows to the head with a baseball bat and attempted cremation to JUST FRICKIN DIE. (read about the bizarre death of Rasputin on wikipedia) I truly cannot stand Hillary Clinton. These past three months, all I've wanted was for her to just go away. After having Clinton put us all through this crap, she should be nowhere near the ticket. But to me, that is not enough. As long as Clinton holds an independent power base in the Democratic Party, she will always have the ability to undermine Obama.

Therefore, Barack Obama must destroy Hillary Clinton.

No, not personally. Senator Clinton will continue to serve in her capacities. Rather, she must be destroyed in the realm of presidential politics. The ground beneath her must be rendered inert so that she has no independent power-base to run on again. Barack Obama must finish the political coup he has started by wrenching away Clinton's base of support and rendering her irrelevant. He must make Hillary Clinton a has-been.

I think you can now see that this is a major reason why I'm a fan of Sebelius. I see nominating her as not merely a shot-across-the-bow but a wholesale power-play that over time will solidify Obama's power in the party and dissipate the Clintons'. I suspect a faction of Clinton support will be outraged and resist this nomination. I also suspect that, as with Obama's nomination, these holdouts will eventually be over-powered and overruled, and they will be forced to submit to the new reality that Kathleen Sebelius, not Hillary Clinton, will be the first woman elected to the White House.

Pretty crazy, I know, but bear with me.

What we are witnessing is a bloodless political coup. The first stage of this coup was Obama winning the nomination and gaining enough influence to force the Clinton camp to concede the race. The second stage in this political coup was consolidating the DNC into Obama's Chicago operations, making Obama's facilities the center of gravity in the Democratic Party. The third stage is what I am proposing: Put Sebelius on the ticket and consolidate Hillary's base under the Obama banner.

Question: Does wanting this to happen make me evil?


Comments (16)

I don't think that Hillary's supporters will be fooled by Kathleen Sebelius being on the ticket. Sebelius isn't a real feminist. Hillary's supporters will see right through her.

What are you talking about, the real anti-feminist is Hillary Clinton.

I sort of hate to ask, but what's the definition of a "real" feminist?

I think being willing (heck, proud) to call yourself pro-choice is a start. Sebeliius isn't.

avatar

What are you talking about? Not only is Kathleen Sebelius pro-choice, the Kansas City Catholic Archbishop recently told all the Kansas City Catholic clergy to deny her communion because of it. Sebelius is pro-choice, has vetoed various abortion restricting bills, and has paid a political price for it.

She says that she's "personally pro-life."

I also don't see how an actual feminist could be a member of the anti-feminist Catholic church.

and I don't think you have any right to judge someone for their religious beliefs/affiliations or whether they're an "actual feminist". There are many Democrats who believe in a woman's right to choose but at the same time understand the moral elements involved in abortions. Republicans are generally the ones who like to divide things into black and white, and use the "with us or against us" language that turns off many people. It's kind of funny to see that the Catholic Church manages to rile up people on the far right for being the "great whore" and people on the far left for being "anti-feminist."

avatar

Its called not trying to impose your own beliefs on other people.

Try it sometime.

She says that she's "personally pro-life."

I'm not sure you understand the meaning of "pro-choice" if you don't consider Sebelius's personal choice to be pro-life as valid. Politically she is pro-choice and has vetoed pro-life legislation - and remember, this is in KANSAS. AND, she was re-elected by a significantly larger margin than when she was first elected governor.

I also don't see how an actual feminist could be a member of the anti-feminist Catholic church.

Please remember that the Contitution makes clear that there can be no religious test to be elected President, but you have decided there needs to be one for getting to call oneself a feminist. If you want to be picky, you could easily label any Christian faith, and most denominations of Judaism as sexist, as they portray God as a partriarchal figure. Maybe followers of those faiths shouldn't be allowed to be feminists either?

Here's some advice, if you would like everyone to join the feminist movement (as I would) then starting by excluding a third of the US population based on where they spend their Sunday mornings is not a great way to start.

OBAMA/SEBELIUS '08

Aren't you special? Being an Actual Feminist and all, you could give the rest of us lessons.

The problem is, no one has ever heard of her. She's not a "National Figure" or a household name that everyday voters know. Most are having a hrd time with Obama becasue they don't feel they know enough about him, if you add in another unknown variable the Democrats are toast.

I agree she's a great candidate for VP, but I'd like to see him pick someone that would boost the National Securty credential side of his candidacy and pull in the security mom's that way.

Beat McCain on facts, not hormones. And for the record, I'm a 51 yr. old white catholic female political junkie.

Obama did say he was looking for someone who knew more domestic stuff rather than national security, which would seem to favor Sebelius, but it might be a mistake to read too much into that remark.

I think Sebelius is not the strongest candidate for the job, but there is an argument to be made for having an unknown person step up -- you get the whole "rollout" idea, where the public becomes familiar with the individual's story and so on, as opposed to someone who's already a known quantity. For this reason, I keep thinking Schweitzer is the secret dark horse for VP.

avatar

Question: Does wanting this to happen make me evil?

No, it doesn't make you evil but it does make you a fucking moron.

...these holdouts will eventually be over-powered and overruled, and they will be forced to submit to the new reality...

Go back to your video games. Jesus.

Indiex, you have a potty mouth. Go sit in a corner for a while. You can come out when you can say, "I'm sorry and it won't happen again."

Abraham speaks hyperbole for emphasis - I understand. A more diplomatic argument would state that Hillary is such a divisive figure in American politics that, at a time when healing and moving forward is crucial, it is imperative for Hillary to continue being what she is doing well - representing the people of the state of NY in the US Senate - and nothing more.

avatar

Destor: John Kerry was a Catholic. Was he anti-feminist? Is every Catholic politician out there an anti-feminist?

What about Ted Kennedy? Didn't he get FMLA passed? Is he not a feminist?

Career Fed: I'm not talking about defeating John McCain. I'm talking about the fact that there are those out there in the Democratic Party who want to hold their own power. The DLC wing of the party. EMILY's List and NOW. The Blue Dogs. These are seperate power centers that Obama doesn't need as future competitors. Obama's strategy has been to consolidate power so he'll actually have an apparatus that will allow him to get things passed. That's why choosing Sebelius makes sense. She has won in a very red, very working class state. She helps Obama makes gains out West and signals that the Democratic Party will be whistling past dixie(google the book). She also helps Obama consolidate Emily's List and NOW so he never finds himself fighting against them like he has with Hillary.

Also, if people don't know you well, you can largely define yourself for a while. This was a distinct advantage for Obama. Why can't Sebelius utilize the very same advantage to define herself?

IndieX: Do you have any specific points you disagree with? Care to share?

I would point out that the vast majority of Clinton supporters are already consolidating behind Obama. I see no reason why a marriage of convenience can't be turned into a marriage of permanence, thus destroying one of Hillary's major reasons for still being relevant.

I like your idea of a bloodless coup. I continue to be astonished that Obama somehow figured out a way to put the unstoppable party juggernaut out of commission. Only in America?

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe



Cafe Features


August 18-22

Book Cover

September 1-4

Book Cover

September 8-12

Book Cover

September 15-20

Book Cover

October 6-12

Book Cover





Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Al Shaw



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address