A not so subtle series of statements by Hillary Clinton this week that she and John McCain had lifetimes of experience to bring to the presidency, but Barack Obama had only a single speech*; and, that she and John McCain passed the Commander-in-Chief test, but Barack Obama did not, signaled not only a shift in campaign tactics but also showed what this campaign for the heart of the Democratic Party is really all about.
By aligning herself in two critical areas with John McCain against Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton was sending this message: the "elite", the establishment, the military-industrial complex will ensure that the two major party candidates are in cahoots with them. Sure, they will each have their own different, but overlapping, networks and interest groups. But, the permanent two-party, elite establishment, speaking sweet words but really cutting very sweet deals for insiders, will prevail. And, with McCain echoing Hillary's attacks, she now gets a three-fer: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and John McCain going after Barack Obama. The Empire Strikes Back!
The Clinton campaign has flailed about looking for a message, a slogan, a reason for her candidacy. "Experience", "Change", "Experience to Bring Change", "Solutions", "Ready to Lead", almost every week there is a different slogan. But, the real message of "experience"is that she -- like McCain -- is part of the establishment and will defend it. That is what her alignment with McCain is all about.
Who takes more lobbyist money than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat? Hillary. Who has more lobbyists in positions of power in the campaign? McCain. Who defended paid lobbyists? Hillary (at the YearlyKos convention). Get the picture?
Here is the establishment's game: once Barack is out of the way, the battle is between two different parts of the establishment, two overlapping groups that, while they fight for ultimate power, are never very far out of it even when the other faction takes over. It is musical chairs where there are as many chairs as people.
All versus Obama. While the mainstream media focuses on whether Barack is nasty enough, or how he will pull off "bipartisanship", Barack's backing of Bill Foster provides a glimpse of how a peoples' president, with intelligence, a gift to inspire and modern technology can change the entire game on behalf of the American people.
Barack Obama -- not Hillary Clinton -- actively, with TV ads, supported Bill Foster's attempt to win Dennis Hastert's (former Speaker) seat in the House after Hastert's resignation. Supporting Foster so openly was a risk, as it could have (and we know, would have) been used by the Clintons to raise doubt about Obama's ability to rally support. After all, one thing Bill Clinton did not have was coattails -- he lost the House for the first time in 40 years, and it remained in Republican hands for 12 years.
Bill Foster won a seemingly unwinnable seat, in a very Republican district. It will only take 10-or so of those to start making Congress (Repubicans and Democrats) start serving the general welfare not the lobbyists. That is not bipartisanship in the old sense. It is creating new, supermajorities by breaking the hold of the establishment has on both party elites.
Nor is this even radical. President Eisenhower, a 5-star general, Republican, warned the country about the dangers of the military-industrial complex in his farewell address. Regrettably, the biggest danger most politicians responded to was the risk of being ousted for not playing along, not exactly what Ike had in mind.
One great example of a transformative potential is Earth Day. Twenty-million people came out of their homes to stand up for the planet. WIth that spontaneous show of support, the movement's leaders identified the "dirty-dozen" Congressmen that were biggest supporters of the polluters. Seven (7) were defeated. The remaining 5 got the message. Despite Nixon's opposition, the seminal environmental laws (Environmental Protection Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act) passed. That's why you and I can drink our water, and breathe our air.
And, that was before the internet, and the netroots, and Facebook, and MySpace, and YouTube!
That is what Obama vs. "McClinton" is really about.
*what is more insulting, to be called a "monster" by a campaign operative; or to have your Senatorial colleague and opponent herself state that your entire life's experience, all you are, is one speech?
So please nail Bush since only god knows exactly what he has done. Slamming Clinton on issues where both are aligned as well as with many on this board does no one any good.
Clinton may have almost half of the Democrats in her corner now. What she fails to understand is that her disgusting 'Rovian' campaign style has assured that she will have half of those democrats voting against her in the General Election... should she slither her way into the nomination. If you doubt this... understand full well that this is not politics as usual anymore. This will be assured destruction for Mrs. Clinton - and she and her supporters will be the pariahs of the Democratic Party... what's left of it.
Mark my words.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUV69LZbCNQ
So I ask this in all seriousness, how is he not another cookie-cutter politician?
That's not quite it. Obama believes in returning the government back to the people so that it'll represent them instead of lobbyists for corporations. Obama is less about "Vote for me and I'll do a, b and c for you", and more about "Vote for me and WE'LL do a, b and c together".
It's that WE that makes Obama different and attractive as a candidate.
He understands that if people want a government that works for them they must be involved in the process that determines how that government will look. People have to get active in their local and state political parties, campaign for good men and women who represent their interests, stay politically informed and educated, talk about politics among one another, keep in contact with their representatives, and finally and most important, ACTUALLY VOTE.
Obama is about bring Americans back into the political process to take back their government.
His opponents this year want Americans to vote for them and then get out of the way.
Here's what I'm saying. In the course of his campaign for presidency he's already lied to many mid-western states, backing away from one policy only to return to it when most of said mid-western states had decided their caucuses/primaries. He's already headed/supported legislation harmful to American citizens. And yes, his position is a top down one that the federal government should be more involved in problem solving nationally, rather than the state and local governments (consistent with how he has treated Illinois with Chicago politics dominating the rest of the state). All of these are traits he shares with Hillary and McCain.
So while he makes one claim (that "we" part), he's proven so far to be another politician based on his actions in this campaign.
Is he really that different, then? What am I missing?
It makes me wonder why Americans cannot see what is truly going on here. How can we allow someone so mean, so hateful, so devious, such a liar, and so psychotic to run our country? To me, that's like shooting ourselves in the foot!
She could get us all killed if someone does something that she doesn't like. She can't even run her campaign without scrutiny. How can she run the country?
I posted the following yesterday to Jane Smiley's entry. My theory as to why HRC does/says the nonsense she does.
"She believes - as do so many in DC (neocons and DLC members especially) - that people are just not smart enough to deal with the issues that confront us. In their disdain (maybe "pity"?) of common people, they haven't the slightest twinge of conscience for resorting to the tactics of karl rove which successfully showed how you can appeal to the basest of human instincts and con massive numbers of people into doing and believing things that are simply outrageous.
"It's OK to resort to those measures because they deem themselves the ONLY people who can keep it all together. There are so many behind-the-scenes games going on non-stop, "normal" people wouldn't be able to get control of their bowels if they had the slightest inkling of their enormity and viciousness. They believe they can take that battleship and get it to turn a little bit so we can do better in this nation - because they know all the players and know all the games. If you don't understand those players, you will surely proffer the end of our nation.
"Billary believe they are justified to do and say whatever they want because the game is sacred. Anyone who challenges the game of world corporate empire building is "naive" or "radical" or "crazy." They may be right. But the thing that they've wrongly fooled themselves into believing is that most of us, as the famous movie line says, "can't handle the truth." The reality of our condition right now, dear Clintons, is that we can't handle the LIES any more. We can't afford - literally and figuratively - the games and the lies any more. Now get your useless asses out of the way so we can try to fix this mess."
By contrast, Barack Obama is the only candidate whose election has the potential to end the era of conservative dominance and transform our whole political dynamic for the better.
Both candidates' performances in the primaries and especially their messaging (Obama's "yes we can" vs. Hillary's "threshold"), have only reinforced this fundamental truth. Little changes if she wins, a lot changes if he does.
HRC is showing unmistakeable signs for years now. We have to get better at spotting this. Our only real choices against the lobbyist and corporate powers were Edwards and Kucinich and possibly Paul. The best remaining candidate is Obama. Like another Huffpo author (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-grahamesmith/the-monster-a-loyal-clin_b_90632.html)
I did my level best to support the Clintons. For years and years, including the last 8. I have nothing against her womanhood or a woman leader. If a 'best qualified' woman made it to the general election I would be an automatic voter for a Dem woman and possibly a Repub woman. The Repub woman is a long shot, there really is no difference between a rep. woman and rep. man. But still, to break the cycle of testosterone and hamfisted and violent man-govts. it would almost be worth it.
However, HRC DISqualified herself. She sucked corporate teat until the bell went off and the light flashed disqualifying her. We cannot let the corrupted, zombified zone of the Left capture the prize. We cannot let the clear will and hope of america to be strangled and bulldogged and hijacked. Hell, there are a LOT of republicans who will vote for obama. Maybe they hate HRC, but I think in their guts they won't vote for her because they know it will be same old business. The same business that has been abusing the repub rank and file for 8 years. Humiliating them. Making them poorer. Laying waste to all their sound talk and responsibility mantra. They want change too. Something honest, something honorable. The hard tasks addressed. Even if they wished the Right would win, way down deep they know we need a truer path. And they will not vote for HRC, perhaps from ancestral loathing of the 90s - and in many cases because they know the Israeli-Fascist-Corporate wing of America will still be in full-stride under HRC. Nothing scares ALL americans more than another 8 years of Boosch-clinton-Boosch-clinton. Except HRC lovers. They seem oblivious to the Mark of the Zombie.
I want to make an appeal to all of them. From someone who has been firmly on your side for a long time. Let her go. She's been bitten. Your TEAM identity is with US....the people, the progressives....not some loyalty to the Clintons. They have a great life. Healthcare til they die. Pensions. Book Deals, tons of corporate cash and a jetset lifestyle. SPeaking engagements until they are too old to take a stage. Let them go. They do not need vindication. They are not forced to live under a rock. People look back on the Clinton Era fondly when compared to Boosch. Let it go.
But the best part is your user name.... tremendous.
How about instead of wasting your time toy just wittle it down to the essential message of your blog.
Hillary very BAD
Barack very GOOD...
see less time and you get the essence of your message across...
So, if B.O. gets in, expect the elites to suck him in, too.
God will win in the end!
Having read all that I can on both candidates - both Obama and Clinton undoubtedly have their fair share of strengths and weaknesses. Their shared popularity attests to that. I fervently hope that on balance the superdelegates consider Obama's stronger; but these are smart and savvy people. They will weigh the 'competition' from all angles, and will no doubt select the one they believe will be the most likely to bring about a Democratic white house. That after all is their job, no matter how we might wish to sway them with compelling arguments or 'shoulds' in support of our favorite. The end of year elections will attest to whether their selection is a good one. I for one am glad the responsibility for the outcome will now rest with them.
The Obama people would rather say Hillary sold them out, to justify their position about supporting Obama or nobody, when in fact she didn't. Hillary is playing smart politics and giving the Obama supporters a preview of what they can expect in the fall if he gets the nod.