Why wait for Hillary's concession speech? Here's the post-game analysis you will be hearing a month from now:
- Hillary had a list, not a message. She could tick off policy proposals that she wanted to ram through Congress, but she she could not tell us how these stones fit together to build a larger cathedral that would last for the ages. Without a larger vision, why do we want to help her lift a stone into place? What comes next is hard, and we know it, and we would like to make sure there is an architectural drawing before we start. Hillary never showed us a larger America she wanted our help to build. Barack did.
- Hillary claimed experience she did not have, and no one was buying it. Every time Hillary opened her mouth to talk about her experience, we were reminded of her health care debacle. As a general rule, a history of failure is not something to remind folks about. It should certainly not be your primary sales point. Every time Hillary tried to sell us about her experience, we were reminded that she thought we were all idiots and she could always get one past us. Look at her Iraq war vote. Instead of copping to the error and the mistake, she claimed it as a selling point. She knew more than we did, she never ceased to tell us. While others had voted right out of ignorance, she had voted wrong because she was well-informed! She could not understand why we did not salute.
- Hillary let us know this election was not about us, but about her. Hillary did not talk about our problems, our fears, our hopes, our frustrations. How could she? She knows nothing of them. Instead, Hillary wanted us to know she had sacrificed so much, and worked so hard, and was so smart. She told us no one else could save America but her. Trouble was, not many of us believed it.
- Hillary's political math was about division not addition. Hillary was counting on being the only exotic candidate in the race, and she figured that women would line up and vote for her simply because she had a uterus. Yes, yes, there was that black fellow, but no one would vote for a black guy named Obama, would they? Get real. As for men, a percentage would always be opposed to a woman candidate, but to hell with them. With 60 percent of caucus goers women, who needed men? But guess what? America still has racial and gender hangups, but it desperately wants to get over them, and the wink-wink, nudge-nudge implicit in Hillary's appeal to the politics of division was a little too overt and a little too distasteful.
- Hillary told us she was infallible one time too many. That's what people heard when she suggested she was the "inevitable" candidate. Well guess what? In America, nothing is inevitable, and if you do not enter the ring with humility you are sure to leave it in humiliation. A lot of Democrats found Hillary's cock-sure arrogance as ugly as George Bush's.
- Hillary dragged all her baggage on stage. Bill Clinton's presence reminded us of Monica, Whitewater, the lies, the Rose Law firm, the cigar, Hillary's contrived "surprise" about Bill's years of serial infidelities, the missing Whitehouse furniture, Travelgate, Chinese donors .... it goes on and on. Fair or not, we all thought the same thing: Did we want four more years of this? The stuff the Clinton's dragged into our living room last time they were in Washington was so ugly we never wanted to see it again. Yet we were pretty sure we would.
- Hillary could not control the dog. If you can't control your own dog on your own porch, don't expect folks to think you can handle the rest of the nation with ease. For a critical month, Bill Clinton seemed to be a loose canon, and we were reminded that Hillary has never been able to control him -- all she could do is turn him out the door and hope he bit someone she didn't like. But of course, this is Bill Clinton, right? This randy hound is just as likely to be siring puppies up the block. And geez, did we want to go through that again?
- Hillary's word was not her bond: America is a land of deals -- New Deals, Fair Deals and Square Deals. But Hillary did not seem to get this. How could anyone negotiate with her in Washington or overseas if she would resort to cheating so quickly in the campaign. And she did try to cheat: first by suing to break the Nevada "Sun Set Strip" caucus deal, and then by trying to change the rules on the "zero count" Michigan and Florida primaries.
- Hillary played the victim card once too often. Hillary cried before the New Hampshire primary, and then acted outraged when some low-level MSNBC commentator talked imprudently about the use of Chelsea as a surrogate. Sorry, but fanning the flames of victimhood is always ugly, especially when it is this contrived. No one is going to vote for someone who assumes the posture of a victim, and does it repeatedly. We want our Presidents strong, not curled in a fetal position with a quivering lip.
- Hillary wrote off a lot of America. Hillary's decided that only a few states and a few people mattered -- Fat cat donors, and folks living in Iowa, New Hampshire, and the big states of New York, and California. The rest of us were fodder and she let us know it. It was all going to be over on Super Tuesday. The little states, the late states, and the "fly over" states were not amused, and neither were the folks who give $5, $20 or $50 to a candidate. We were reminded, once again, that Hillary Clinton believes the elite and the chosen are who are really important, and not those who are least among us. Hillary was more interested in cultivating the Super Delegates than she was in cultivating the grass roots.
Of course there's more. Barack is an astounding candidate and a genuine brain and force of nature. He is the real deal, and the real deal will always beat the pretender.
Then there is the fact that Hillary hired the same-old same-old, and did it the same old way, with high-priced consultants like Mark Penn who burned through money like it was kitty litter.
Hillary also did not seem to have someone like Michelle Obama in her corner -- someone who could stand up to her and correct her message and get her refocused. Maybe Bill could do this once, but not now. He has either lost the authority or lost his touch.
And then, of course, there is the elephant in the living room: Hillary really does think we are all idiots.
And no doubt she has reason to think so. Look at how American acted during the Monica Lewinsky debacle. Look at how easily we have been misled and duped by corporate shills and toadies in the past.
That said, even us idiots don't like to be told we are idiots. Tell a parking attendant he is powerless, ugly and stupid, and just see how your car looks when it is returned back to you.
When Bill and Hillary told us Barack Obama was an illusion and a fantasy, what the Clintons were really saying was that anyone who sitting on the political fence was an idiot for listening or even considering an alternative to The Inevitable Hillary.
Yeah, we heard you Hillary. We heard you Bill. And we voted accordingly.
.
6 comments:
"She could tick off policy proposals that she wanted to ram through Congress, but she she could not tell us how these stones fit together to build a larger cathedral that would last for the ages."
Is that a reflection of the old socialist dream, one man, one vote, once?
Nothing in politics "lasts through the ages". And I feel very uncomfortable with politics that aspires to.
Ah, then you are missing what lasts. America lasts. The nation is the Cathedral that is being built.
The idea is right on the money -- the symbolism behind the unfinished pyramid on the dollar bill. Obama's vision of what America should aspire to -- his Cathedral, if you will -- is also right on the money: E Pluribus Unum.
Hillary does not have that vision (or at least she has not articulated it). She is not describing the Cathedral she would have us work to build. She is talking about parts of things, but never telling about the larger architecture. There is no nation; only policy proposals.
McCain, I think, has some vision, but he is being forced to run towards the most pinched message of the most conservative element of the Republican party: "Out of many will come the only thing that matters: Me, myself and I."
Only in the area of national defense is McCain articulating a larger message, and then it is the message of the Porcupine; quills out and rattling. It is all defense and offers no greater aspiration than to survive the attack of the feral dog that are terrorists with box cutters. It is a small vision, I think. It is certainly not Reagan-esque.
Patrick
The ideals of America are of individualism, self-reliance, and of voluntary community.
The forced "community" of the left has no part of it. (Hillary is in favor of garnishing the wages of those who choose not to obtain health insurance, as a part of her "universal" health care. Is Obama?)
The ideals of America are pretty clearly laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. I do not claim to be an expert on these documents, but I do not think individualism, self-reliance, and voluntary community appear in any of them.
What is set out in our Founding Documents by our Founders is the purpose of Government and the nation as a whole.
As the Declaration of Independence notes:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. __ That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
Seems clear enough.
The U.S. Consitition starts off:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Again, seems clear enough.
There's not a lot in there about individualism, self-reliance, and voluntary community. Those are Hollywood cowboy movie concepts. Nothing wrong with those ideas (I am a fan of the ideas), but they are not necessarily the founding thoughts of our Founders.
The important words of our Founders appear to be "We the people ... in order to form a more perfect union."
"We the people" is different rom "Me the person."
And the phrase "in order to form a more perfect union" is quite distinct from the goal of "to do whatever I want."
There's a lot of history here, but this nation was basically founded on the Social Contract of John Locke. See >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
As to how all this played out in the real world, and right from the beginning, I would suggest looking into the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion. See >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion
The point here is that U.S. history has always been about a certain amount of forced community. That's true everywhere in the world. The alternative to a limited amount of forced community is anarachy. And NO ONE is anxious to go to the Sudan or Chechnya last I looked.
As for health care, Obama is against forcing folks to join a one-size fits all plan; he thinks if health care is affordable people will join on their own. It's the main difference between his health plan and Hillary's and been a topic of most of their debates.
Patrick
"A certain amount of forced community"? Therein lies the rub.
Reduced to its simplest terms, the Constitution is a contract between the American people and our government and outlines the responsibilities and authority of each party. As you note in quoting the Declaration, "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
The powers ceded to the government by the people are listed specifically in the text of the Constitution. Congress has only those powers specified in Article I, Section 8. To ensure the meaning was clear, the Constitution was later amended to add the Bill of Rights which contains Amendment X - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
If you read The Federalist Papers or any of the bodies of work from that period, it's clear that the specific powers granted in the body of the Constitution are the only ones legitimately wielded to further the general goals put forth in the Preamble.
We have traveled far from that concept, both Republicans and Democrats alike. If enough of us believe that government needs additional power to perform additional functions beyond those in the Constitution, the correct way to implement the change is through the amendment process, not through legislative, executive or judicial fiat.
bs
Yep, we have a democracy, and we get to vote.
It's a large part of what makes America great.
We have laws, and we can change them in order to strengthen them, relax them, or improve them, and we do that with dizzying frequency.
In fact, we have an organized revolution every two years in this country. The govern govern only if we consent (some restrictions in Florida not withstanding).
Again, it's what makes America great.
To top it all off, the House of Representatives is tempered by the Senate, and both of them are tempered by the President who, in turn, is tempered by the Supreme Court (and to some extent by State courts).
And yes we have speeding laws, immigration laws, narcotics laws, the FDA, etc. That's the way we want it, because those laws are part of what make America different from some of the piss-poor countries of the world where they don't have laws.
Not sure what the controversy is.
Tax dodgers, draft dodgers, and Ron Paul kooks aside, most of us seem to understand that we have a lot of laws, some of which we adore and some of which we hate.
The way we change things is at the polls. That's the system, and it's the system that has made the United States of America the greatest country on earth since the beginning of time.
Are we perfect? Not quite, but as the unfinished pyramid on the dollar bill suggests, we are still under construction. The best, I am pretty sure, is yet to come.
P.
Post a Comment