“No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”.

- attributed to NY State Judge Gideon Tucker



Thursday, November 1, 2007

Hillary On The Defensive

The Wall Street Journal's recent piece on the Democratic Presidential candidates' "debate" on the Drexel University campus in Philadelphia, portrayed Hillary Clinton as beginning to exhibit the behaviors which I personally believe will ultimately deny her the White House.

For example, the Journal piece read, in part,

"Indeed, each of her rivals condemned Mrs. Clinton's vote on the Iran resolution as unnecessary saber rattling. Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware voted against the measure; Mr. Obama missed the voted. Several of the Democrats said the nonbinding resolution harked back chillingly to the march to war in Iraq. Mrs. Clinton said she considered the vote -- essentially for economic sanctions against Iran's elite military -- to be a part of diplomacy, not a prelude to battle.

Instead of pushing back, though, Mrs. Clinton turned her criticism on President Bush, condemning his administration on nearly every level as one that needed to be junked. She noted that if she were on board with the Republicans, "I don't think [they] got the message that I'm voting and sounding like them." A few minutes later, she referred to "the Republicans and their constant obsession with me."

Mr. Edwards couldn't let this last bit of rhetoric pass by. "Maybe they want to run against you," he said."

Two things seem apparent to me from this recounting of the Hillary's conduct during the debate.

One is that she is already becoming what I would call "brittle." It's a characteristic I have been expecting to come out sooner or later. Guess it's sooner, after all.

Hillary combines her desire to be and continue to be front-runner, with a sort of presumption that this means she is unassailable. It's almost as if thinking and acting it, will make it so.

The second thing is that she reacts to criticism and challenges from her fellow candidates by attacking our current President, for whom she has obvious hatred.

But she isn't running against him. Initially, she's running against Obama and Edwards. Next, perhaps, she'll run against Giuliani, Romney, McCain, or Thompson.

In this regard, I have to believe George Bush is having a laugh even now. After all, only 16 people have won two terms as President of our Republic. He has no need to prove himself again.

I cannot help but believe Hillary is running against the wrong adversary. In a sense, it's as if she wants to run against a defenseless candidate. And this retiring two-term President is defenseless, in the sense that he secure in his philosophy and accomplishments.

Could Hillary be making a major mistake by doing this? I think so. Even Democratic voters must realize that the next election doesn't feature Bush. And railing against him is not at all the same as advancing a positive vision of the future.

So many of Hillary's positions are taken in opposition to the current administration's actions and doctrines. Will that sell when she has live, active opponents challenging her for the nomination of her own party for President?

Her cavalier attitude regarding the release of documents informing us about her role in her husband's administration was captured by this Journal passage,

"Mrs. Clinton dismissed criticism of a ban, which her husband sought, that would keep the National Archives from releasing Clinton administration papers until 2012. Asked by the moderator if she would lift the ban, she replied, "That's not my decision to make." But Mr. Obama called the Clinton ban "a problem," saying Democrats need to open government after "one of the most secretive administration's in our history," Mr. Bush's."

Both by her dismissal of her opponents in favor of President Bush as her adversary, and her rather haughty, dismissive attitude regarding most criticisms of the few detailed plans she has put forth, Hillary seems to be assiduously cultivating an image of arrogance.

As if she naturally will win the Democratic nomination, and, of course, the Democrats have to win, because Bush is so...well....un-Democratic.

In the past few days, and especially after reading this account of the recent debate, I've come to believe that Hillary has caught that most dangerous of Presidential candidate diseases.

I call it the "I've waited long enough, it's my turn, dammit!" disease, and I wrote about it here, in March of this year.

Bob Dole had the disease. I think John McCain contracted it, as well. Now, it looks like it's infected Hillary.

Is it merely coincidence that all are or were US Senators? I think not.

And for this reason, as well as my belief that an accomplished executive- governor, mayor, CEO, etc.,- will beat a non-VP or incumbent former- or sitting Senator, I don't believe Hillary will win the White House in 2008.

No comments: