My Pretend Interview with Hillary Clinton

Saturday night, I went to the Jefferson Jackson dinner in Des Moines, Iowa, and listened to Nancy Pelosi and all of the Democratic candidates (except for chic-magnet Dennis Kucinich, who wasn't invited). By the way, Nancy, it was me, who in moments of silence, kept shouting "Impeach Cheney!" I wasn't heckling you. I was REMINDING you. Here's the rundown:

Edwards was the most dynamic, Richardson was the most reassuring, Biden was the best screamer, Dodd doesn't stick in my mind, Clinton was the most programmed, and Obama was more serious and mature than I had expected from his pictures.

Subsequently, I read Andrew Sullivan's article in The Atlantic about the meaning of Obama's candidacy, Joe Klein's article in Time about Clinton, Joseph Stiglitz' article in Vanity Fair detailing the economic shit that is going to hit the fan as a result of Bush's War Crime (and here I decided I had better move to France if I don't want to be impoverished in my old age). I read the Blackwater contract in the October Harper's (a must-read). And then I had a dream in which I interviewed Hillary Clinton:

Hillary: Thank you, Jane, for interviewing me, and giving me a chance to discuss my real feelings about the issues confronting the American people.

Jane: My pleasure, Senator, but please don't use that phrase "the American People." Whenever anyone uses that phrase, I know that he or she is about to pronounce some bit of political bullsh*t.

Hillary: What is your first question?

Jane: What is it that you most want to happen to the U.S.?

Hillary: I want to end the divisions in the American People between the right and the left, and to calm the political storm that we see round us. I want to move forward toward a more just society where children have healthcare and Americans feel safe--

Jane: Excuse me, Senator Clinton, but these phrases don't mean anything. They are too general. Let's take the issues of your candidacy one at a time. In the hypothetical situation that your candidacy proves as divisive as polls say it will be (84 percent of Republicans would not vote for you under any circumstances), how would you expect your candidacy to quell divisions?

Hillary: Giving speeches, advertising, enunciating policies, and plain old familiarity could reduce that number.

Jane: Opposition to you is more entrenched than it is to any other candidate.

Hillary: Well, to tell the truth I don't care about that. This is something I want to do. I feel that I have worked hard and I deserve this. This is my payback.

Jane: But don't you risk taking the whole Democratic party down with you?

Hillary: That's the business of the Democratic party, not me. I want to do this, and I have the money and corporate support. The donors know me, and I know them, and we understand each other. That's what's important to me.

Jane: On to another question, then. On many issues dear to the Democratic base, you have voted with George Bush. You have failed to act on your stated opposition to his disastrous policies. Why is that?

Hillary: I have always explained my votes. There are details to every issue that the American People don't understand that I do understand. Elected officials are expected to know more than their constituents, and I do. The average citizen really can't have an informed opinion, but I am very experienced, and my opinion is the best informed.

Jane: So, on balance, you have agreed to Bush's policies, even though they are almost uniformly deleterious to the U.S. economy, society, and world prestige?

Hillary: I don't AGREE with them, but I don't MIND them. I can see his point of view. And when things come up for a vote in the Congress, I DO see his point of view. Don't forget, I've been in the White House. A president doesn't like to go hat in hand to Congress, or have his or her ideas subject to Congressional oversight. I want to be president, so as a member of Congress, I don't plan to pre-empt my own future power. That's the most important thing.

Jane: What about your ties, and those of your husband, to powerful corporate donors?

Hillary: CEOs are people like anyone else. They have needs and desires. Just because they have lots and lots of money doesn't mean we should ignore them. And it is good for my campaign not to ignore them. Look at John Edwards. He can't even afford TV advertising in IOWA of all places. It isn't realistic to act in opposition to your own ruling class. You can give them most of what they want and still have okay healthcare and schools and infrastucture. At least, that's what I believe now. We'll see how that works out when I am elected.

Jane: Why do you want to stay in Iraq for your first term?

Hillary: Because it would be a sign of weakness, in me and in the American People, to cut and run. I'm a woman and a Democrat. I can't simply redefine character and courage. The American People like to swagger and act tough, and I have to act that way in order to get elected, which is my first priority. Also, we've built all those buildings and bases over there. We can't just walk away from them.

Jane: Your main principle seems to be to talk big and carry a small stick. When I heard you in Des Moines, you seemed to want the "Hillary production" to distract us from what you were saying -- you left specific ideas for the end of a long speech, during which your supporters, who had been equipped with inflatable bats to beat together, repeatedly prevented the audience from actually listening to what you were saying.

Hillary: That is my principle, and who's to say, if it gets me elected, that it's not a good principle? I'll do anything to get elected, and my handlers think that voters respond better to hypnosis than they do to ideas. That's fine with me. My whole campaign is about the power of advertising.

Jane: At the same time, if you enunciated your principles more clearly, then we would have something to hold you to in the unlikely circumstance that you were actually elected while forgoing the votes of something like a third of the voters.

Hillary: Exactly! Why should I give you something to hold against me? You liked my husband when he was president. That should be enough for you.

Jane: Is it enough for you?

Hillary: Absolutely.

Jane: Do you see what a dangerous moment in U.S. history that this is?

Hillary: I say I do.

Needless to say, I woke up from this dream screaming.

Comments

[Walterba]

Same old same, old hatchet job.I look at all of the candidates' websites and Clinton's website couldn't be more detailed.(­You may not like her answer but they are certainly there.) According to this article Republicans won't vote for Hillary. HELLO??? In every head to head matchup she beats all of the Republicans. Just average out all of the polls and more significantly when you weight the polls for reliabilit­y.A website provides that. None of the other Democratic candidates do that in the polls . So do you want Edwards to be at the top of the ticket? He ran for President in 2004 because he knew he couldn't get re-elected in his home state of NC. He was a no-show as the VP candidate. And Obama?? He gives inspirational speeches once in a while.Talk about generalities. Where are his specifics? I'm the father of two adopted black boys and I cheer at every inroad my children make. But I want a candidate to succeed as president. Sad to say Obama has a very thin resume. Granted it is better than George Bush's but that's not saying much. He's very vulnerable in a general election. Guliani would chew him up and spit him out. He is not one we would want to head the Democratic ticket.Mor­e important is the fact that all candiadates need to raise idiotic sums of money so, whoever is elected , Obama ( takes corporate money but God forbid, not from their lobbyists) , "Hedge Fund"Edwards (I'm for the poor) each have a big, big IOUs that would get cashed in. It will continue unless we overturn Buckley v. Valeo.

[soupcity]

In all fairness, Ms Smiley, you really should do imaginary interviews with all the candidates.

[allisartisall]

oh, how i love you, jane smiley. you have owned my heart for years because of your brave writing, and now, because of your brave stance on the mess our country is in. you could not be more spot on than this "imaginary" interview with hillary. even her cadences, her ignoring your request not to mention "the american people", on and on - all accurate. i have waited for someone of merit to point out that this empress wantabe has no clothes. brava!

[marylizz]

thanks Jane! Hillary's voting record scares me. She falls in lockstep too often. I support John Edwards or Joe Biden. Give the presidency a break from the family dynasties.

[DillPickle]

Hi..to all of you all out there "rooting" in the muck; that is what hogs do..they don't know any better. Mrs. Clinton is no better nor is she any worse than any other candidate; although she did try to fix it so that we had universal health care when she was "first lady", but was shot down by the insurance industry and other misguided ignorant people. You let Bush and his lawless gang sell you a false bill of goods with his "fascist" scare tactics and you see where it got us. Not a pretty picture is it; yet it seems like all that "you" are able to do now is to act like "fighting dogs"..you don't care about your country.."­you" go to church and spout your piety, but all the while...yo­ur heart is black with sin. I think that these United States are in more trouble than most of you realize. But, keep "rooting".­..maybe God will let you have the government that you deserve!

[JacqueItch]

Hillary Clinton is part of the MilitaryIn­dustrialGo­vernment alliance.
She'll do ultimately whatever they want.
She seeks----C­RAVES---po­wer.
That's the true Hillary.
Part of her shtick is the unstated premise that because she is a woman and a mother she will eventually craft policies more favorable to genuine family concerns..­.. a lot of people are optimistically hoping that her course of action will be diametrically opposed to Bush43's.
I doubt it. She's Thatcher redux.

Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, Chris Dodd and a few others are far better choices for an America CEO----but it may be time to completely alter the presidency from being a monarchy to Statespers­on-Officia­l-Greeter for international relations.
We don't see the presidency as a monarchy.
It IS in all but name.
It's insane.

[rjcrane]

Here are my questions to Hillary:

Me: You have stated the reason you voted for the Resolution that Bush used to invade Iraq was because it represented diplomacy allowing Bush to try resolve the problems with Iraq and weapons inspections through the UN. Is that correct?

Hillary: "Yes, that's correct."

Me: If that's your position, why did you vote against the Levin Amendment, which would have required Bush to come before Congress before he used military force against Iraq?

Hillary: "Ooops!...­I was hoping you wouldn't ask me that. I don't have a good answer. Sort of makes all of my prior statements sound lame, doesn't it?

Me: Also why were you still supportive of the Iraq war and one of its primary cheerleaders long after it was clear Iraq didn't have an WMDs?

Hillary: "Why I wanted to make sure we could win there...I didn't want us to fail."

Me: So it was okay with you that hundreds of thousands of innocent people were being killed and maimed as a result of our invasion, millions more were fleeing the country and our government was wasting hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, and Iraq was heading towards a civil war...and you thought we could win this war? Define winning?

Hillary: "Well I guess what I meant at the time by winning was that everything would die down eventually if we stayed there long enough...i­t wasn't like any side could surrender to our troops."

Me: Hillary, you are a trained lawyer who also practiced law. I have read the Use of Force Authorization and couldn't find one reference in it that required Bush to exhaust all remedies before invading Iraq. Can you tell me why with all of your legal training you wouldn't have insisted that something like this be in that document before voting for it?

Hillary: "Gee, you got me there. I wouldn't even buy a toaster without making sure it had a good warranty that I could rely upon if something went wrong with it.

RJ Crane, editor
topplebush.com

[dawlishgal]

THANKS. I wish that people would remember that when HC was asked if she intended to have any members of the "PATIENT CLASS" in her little secretive cabal that cooked up her failed health care plan, she replied that they were just another "interest group" . Sounds an awful like her defense as lobbyists as poor working slobs doing their jobs.

[esl]

Are you saying that Hillary Clinton is more programmed than any of the other Democrat candidates? Give me a break. They are all the same except Hillary is a woman. If the women of Huffingtonpost who are so smitten with the good looking Obama get their way the only woman who has a chance to be president will be defeated. Shame on you.

[vote4kucinich]

Dear Jane Smiley, I have you to thank for causing me to read Naomi Klein's book, The Shock Doctrine. Every morning for the past three weeks I have sipped my morning tea while experiencing wave after wave of shock from having my eyes opened to what 'American interests' really means. It's not pleasant medicine but necessary and I hope many others who need it will take the cure. So now I understand what is behind Hillary Clinton's bland reassurances and refusals to be specific about her goals. Her Presidency will continue America's policies of world domination disguised as 'bringing democracy' to all the poor countries of the world who have not signed on yet to being dominated. Our political discussions are so superficial that they are basically worthless. Thank you for pointing out that the most worthless exchanges have Hillary Clinton on one side of them.

[Ubertext]

TOwWN HALL MEETING tonight wednesday at 9PM will provide an opportunity for the KUCINICH campaign to introduce the New Constitutional Convention Initiative to supporters and anyone who is concerned about the state of affairs in the United States. The New Constitutional Convention Initiative will include a a series of nationally broadcast discussions (via www.kucinichtv.com) that seek to accomplish three outcomes:
-Outline the ongoing assaults on the Constitution
-An educational component / civics lesson to clarify the intent of the framers and provide a foundation for understanding the ongoing assaults on the Constitution
-Discuss in detail what can be done collectively and individually to restore crucial constitutional principles

[CajunCountry]

My fear is we'll all wake up screaming but the Ruling Class complete with private jets, private banks, private security guards won't give a shit as they try to move to looting China or India or whatever target is next to be annexed to Richistan.

Even nearly extinct species the responsible 'real' , as opposed to 'movement', conservative 'gets' that our current trajectory is parlous in the extreme:

'Blue collar workers lost bargaining power catastrophically following the peak of the 1973 cycle, and since 2000 their failure has been accompanied by a more generalized loss of bargaining power by white collar workers and all toilers below the level of top management. Employers no longer feel compelled to offer their workforce either a decent wage or the most basic of healthcare benefits, benefits which were considered sacrosanct in the social contract of 1945-73.Th­e American dream, in which hard work can propel ordinary people into a comfortable even affluent lifestyle, is becoming ever more distant for all but a small fraction of the population­.'
- Martin Hutchinson, The Disappearing Middle Class
http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php?option=com_
content&vi­ew=article­&id=4819&I­temid=53

What is to become of the US when 50% of the population owns among themselves only 12% of the nation's income? When the Ruling Class have pulled up the ladder behind themselves and raised unrestrained avarice to our highest 'virtue'.

'I've got mine, Screw you. Screw the planet.' has replaced 'E Pluribus Unum'.

[Macready]

Oh Jane you are the best . . . and the scariest part is that is exactly what mz hillary is about . . . it's all about her . . .not about accountability, not about issue or having a set agenda for change . . . it is about continuing the corporate status quo and yet more needless suffering, ruined lives just more war and destruction for the sake of corporate America . . . to feed her need for power

the future with this woman in the WH would be indeed be a nightmare . . . I am not surprised you woke up screaming . . .

[Purple Girl]

I doubt you were dreaming- it was a telepathic connection­.Frankly I'm ashamed of the feminine examples we currently have to contend with. What happened to ALL the ladies (Nancy,
diane, Barbara- even Gov. Granholm is no longer impressive (MI is in the hole- thanks all my lected officials for letting the Big 3 run the place for a century).W­hat industry do you think wrote the handbook they've all been using? If you want to forecast the Nations future- just check out where Michigan is AGAIN ('70's), but hey we can still cal our selves the 'leaders'- even though it's on the way down too.

[LindaJay]

Another Hillary hit piece. Why do we need the republicans, the democrats are so good at eating each other up and spitting them out?