Every so often in American politics a party nominates an insurgent, not because of his/her experience, but simply because their message strikes a resonate chord with the most active faction of the party at that time.
The Hillary Clinton bandwagon is running at full steam. With all the usual cautions about three years being a very long time in politics, there are other reasons to question this inevitability -- or, more to the point, the advisability -- of electing Hillary Clinton as president.
Christie loudly tagged his big reelection win as a frontal challenge to the GOP to at least partially rethink its position on key issues, win the war against the Democrats to win back a majority of independents, and most importantly free itself from being hostage to Tea Party fanaticism.
Can Hillary Clinton run for president as the Great Uniter -- someone who can overcome the country's crippling partisan gridlock? A message of conciliation and compromise may be just what voters are looking for in 2016.
Senator John F. Kennedy charted his path to the presidency in 1960 and modern aspirants would be wise to study his journey and reflect on his example because it remains relevant, even in today's very different world.
It's reasonable to expect that both productions could dredge up enough semi-dormant Clinton controversy to negatively impact her. So for the RNC to go absolutely RepubliBonkers over programming which it knows little about seems monumentally ill-advised.
When its constituents start referring to Sen. John McCain as a liberal you know the GOP bus has officially careened off the cliff. Let's just visit McCain's record for a second, because perspective and context here is critical.
As for Priebus, he should stop whining like a 12-year-old about what the so-called liberal media does or doesn't do for Hillary Clinton. Let him call Rupert Murdoch and ask Fox Television to make all the movies they want about the Republican candidates.