V.P. Clinton? Forget About It!

It is amazing. A day doesn't go by where I am not knocked almost senseless by the utter shamelessness of Hillary Clinton. Her campaign appearances are a virtual cornucopia of insincerity. Did you ever notice this? Every time she takes the stage, within ten seconds she'll flash a big shit-eating grin to a "friend" in the audience, she'll then point to that person and vigorously nod - it happens every single time! If you think I am exaggerating, watch her the next time she mounts the stage at a rally. To whom do you think she is pointing? Here's the answer: no one. It makes for a good photo opportunity. One of the most iconic photographs ever taken of President Kennedy was at a press conference in 1961. Jack is in the midst of a good laugh and is acknowledging the next reporter's question by pointing at him. The Democrats (and more than a few Republicans) have always loved that photo and many of them have tried to emulate it. Hillary is just doing her tried and true, John Fitzgerald Wannabe impersonation
`

It is now clear to anyone who has been bothering to pay attention that the Junior Senator from the state of New York is quite content to hold the Democratic Party hostage for as long as it suits her merry whim. She knows damned good and well that she is not going to be chosen as the standard bearer for the Democratic party at the convention in Denver this August. The only chance she will ever have at wining the nomination will be by running as second on the ticket this year, subtly sabotaging the campaign from within and trying again in 2012. Does that sound like a slightly paranoid scenario? Maybe it is - but I have earned the right not to trust Senator Hillary Clinton. You've earned it too.
.
Be forewarned: our gal has every intention of hijacking the party of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt by forcing it to put her on the ticket as Senator Obama's running mate. How bad of an idea is this? Let me count the ways....Here are seven good reasons why she should not be on the ballot in 2008:
**********
Reason #1:
It's all a matter of balance. Let's face some serious facts here, kiddies. The Dems have taken a decided roll of the dice by giving the nod to a relatively obscure, forty-six year old black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. To say that this ticket is going to have to be carefully and perfectly balanced is the understatement of the century. Two major precedents on one ticket is much more than this silly country can handle. Like it or not, if Barack is going to be successful in November, his VP nominee will have to be a southern, white male - he doesn't even have to be a conservative! The American people have had damned near thirty years of the putrid Reagan/Gingrich/Bush/Bush Revolution and are finally awakening to the fact that it will take generations to undo the damage that has been done to this once-great nation by these clowns. Trust me on this one: they are now more than willing to go in a new direction. In fact, they are desperate to do so.
.
Reason #2:
We've already had eight years of Dick Cheney. Do you seriously believe that, were the Democrats somehow able to win with her on the ticket, she would ever consent to the traditional roll of the vice-president as defined in the U.S. Constitution? In other words, do you think for a minute that Hillary Clinton would spend eight or even four years presiding over the senate, waiting to break a tie? That is the only role the vice-president is legally required to play. All else is extra-constitutional. It's easy to imagine Vice-President Clinton mounting a counter presidency within the administration, causing nothing but grief and embarrassment to President Obama.
.
Reason #3:
America is sick to death of the Clintons. Having Senator Clinton on the ticket is not a necessity - in fact it is nothing more than an unnecessary risk. I was a Democrat at one time - and not just a passive Democrat, either: I was a member of the Orange County (New York) Democratic Committee. I left that party a decade ago for many reasons. William Jefferson and Hillary Clinton are just two of those reasons. Between the two of them they were able to set progressive politics in this country back half a century. Two for the price of one, huh? Thanks but no thanks.
.
Reason #4:
It's all about Hillary. In October of 2003 Senator Clinton stupidly voted to give this president (of all presidents) the authority to wage war on the sovereign nation of Iraq without the constitutionally mandated congressional approval. That vote should have been the biggest no-brainer of her career and she blew it! That she had her eye on the 2008 election and she was trying to prove that she was as blood thirsty as any man, there can be no denying. Would voting against that measure have been seen as an act of political courage? Sure it would have, given the hysterical nature of the time. But that's what you expect from a potential president: courage, not expediency. For that reason alone, she doesn't deserve to have her name on a laundry ticket.
.
Reason #5:
Have you noticed how unbearably condescending Hillary is with her supporters? Barack Obama, on the other hand, speaks up to his audience, appealing to their imagination and intellect. Walking away from an Obama rally, one feels inspired. After three minutes of Hillary Clinton, I just want to take a shower. Barack has refused - time and again - to pander to the lowest common denominator. Hillary has demonstrated too many times to count that there's no depth to which she won't sink. ("SHAME ON YOU, BARACK OBAMA") Shame on you, Hillary.
.
Reason #6:
The Far Right at the moment is as dejected as they've been at any point since 1964. Their motivation is dead. How to motivate them? Three words: Hillary Rodham Clinton. They can't kick poor old Teddy Kennedy around anymore (God bless him). Hillary is the bell that will make these knuckleheads drool like a pack of half-witted Pavlovian dogs. My advice? Keep her off the ticket.
.
Reason #7:
Honestly, would you be able to stomach four more years of those stupid pants suits? I ask you.

**********
The Clintonistas are now implying that their gal has been a victim of sexism throughout this whole nasty process. Oh, please! The reason I am not supporting Hillary Clinton is not because she is a woman, it is because she is Hillary Clinton. If her name had been Eleanor Holmes Norton, I would be working overtime to secure her the nomination - Barack Obama be damned.
.
So there you have it. Vice-President Clinton? Bad idea. Don't even go there, okay? Every election since 1980 has had a Bush or a Clinton - or both - on the ticket. Let's put a stop to this stupid dynastic trend in our national elections. That isn't what this country is all about. Not even close.
.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
.
BREAKING NEWS:
In a meeting this morning with the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Argus-Leader newspaper, Senator Clinton was asked why she didn't get out of the race. After explaining to them that her husband wasn't able to secure the nomination until the June 1992 California primary (which isn't true, by the way, he had wrapped it up weeks before) she then went on to make the following, incredible statement:
.
"We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California....uhh....you know I just, I don't understand it....I find it curious, and I don't want to attribute motivations and strategies to people that I don't really know. But it is - It's a historical curiosity to me....I don't understand it."
.
I understand it, Hillary. You need a long rest, dear. That's not a sexist statement; that's an undeniable fact. As Keith Olbermann asked this evening on MSNBC's Countdown, "Why, in the name of all that all of us hold dear, would she say anything like this?"
.
The Clinton campaign is over. So is any chance she had to be second on the ticket.
.
Never mind.