Like It or Not: It's Hillary

The cross that progressives have to bear in 2016

"I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

Will Rogers

Like it or not (and I have to confess that I don't like it one bit) Hillary Clinton is, at this hour, the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party, and, barring a miracle, it is she who will be the "progressive" standard bearer in the campaign of 2016. Too many parlor liberals were unable to see the forest through the trees; they were so intent on seeing the first woman take the oath of office as chief-executive on January 20, 2017, that they let their hearts overtake their heads. As for myself, I was hoping (praying) that Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts would throw her hat into the ring. I'm sure she had her reasons for not doing so, and I don't doubt for a minute that they were damned good reasons. She's doing remarkable work as a senator, holding up a mirror and forcing America to come face-to-face with the hideous image of what it has become. She and Bernie Sanders are the two best things to happen to progressive politics in this country in a very long time.

Here, yet again, is one of those bad news/good news scenarios that seem to be everywhere you look on the political landscape these days.

The Bad News: 
Hillary Clinton is the worst possible candidate the Democrats could have put forward this year - or any year for that matter.

The Good News: 
She'll be running against Donald Trump.

It's a sad thing indeed when the most positive thing one can say about her is that she's not Donald Trump. I don't think she will be a good president. I might be wrong about this. I sincerely hope I am. Perhaps her plan all along has been to walk the walk in order not to aggravate the plutocracy. Perhaps she sincerely intends on honest, progressive representation. We shall see. You'll forgive me my cynicism. Any prospective presidential candidate who is paid three-quarters-of-a-million BIG ONES to give speeches to a bunch of corrupt bankers at which the public is excluded - and then has the nerve to refuse to release the transcripts of those speeches - has handily earned the skepticism of any thinking person.

Think about this: When asked who he would prefer as president, billionaire neo-con Charles Koch said, in front of a television camera, that he would prefer Clinton over Trump. That's not a particularly hopeful sign, folks. Perhaps he has read the transcripts of her secret speeches to the Goldman Sachs crowd. We who lean left have every right and reason to be suspicious of this candidate.

Having Hillary Rodham Clinton as the nominee is like, as the great political humorist, Mort Sahl, once put it in another, slightly different context: "finding out you're pregnant and trying to fall in love as rapidly as possible." We'll just have to roll with the punches. The best thing that can be said, at least from the perspective of June 10, 2016, is that this country will survive Hillary Clinton. That's not the case as far as The Donald is concerned. I'll say it again: If the American people are stupid enough to send this guy to the White House next January 20, they'll deserve everything that happens to them. There is no excuse for mass stupidity.

The most ironic thing about this whole mess is the sad fact that the Dems were handed this year - on a silver platter, mind you - the most visionary candidate in their nearly two-hundred year history, and they blew it. Leave it to those silly Democrats: Give them two clear choices and they'll make the wrong one every time - and that would include every nominee since 1980. Damned-near all of the polls had Bernie defeating Trump very easily in November. That's not the case with Ms. Clinton. A few polls are showing her barely neck-and-neck with him.

Neck-and-neck with Donald Trump. Can you imagine?
`
Because of Bernie Sanders, the eyes of America have been opened wide. It's never going to be the same. There is a good reason why Bernie is going to take his fight to the convention in Philadelphia this summer. He's not trying to "divide" the Democratic Party (as he has been accused of doing). He is merely attempting to make damned sure that he has a hand in composing the party's platform as they make their way to do battle in the autumn campaign. He has every right to take part in this - and he should. When this is all over, it will be difficult for Hillary to ease herself back to the center-right, to the role of the squishy moderate that she has always seemed most comfortable playing. We're in a new era now, and it would do her well to understand this.
`

The whole world was watching

A final word of caution: There has been a lot of talk out there in the Facebooksphere regarding angry supporters of Bernie showing up in Philly and disrupting the festivities this summer. While I empathize with their anger (I'm pretty angry, too!) I just want to remind them about the summer of 1968. A lot of people, justifiably, went into a blind rage when LBJ's vice-president, Hubert Humphrey, received the nomination that year. The end-result of the chaos of the 1968 Democratic convention was five-and-a-half years of Dick Nixon.

Remember your American history - and learn from it.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

SUGGESTED VIEWING:

Where To Invade Next
A film by Michael Moore

For a change, Mike's latest film is not about the United States. It's primarily about Europe, and the life the people lead over there, free from the societal, educational and economic dysfunction that we in America take for granted. Seventy years ago, Germany lay in ruins. You wouldn't know it. Comparing the two countries in 2016, one could be forgiven for thinking that they won the war. 

Here is a link to order it off of Amazon.com:

https://www.amazon.com/Where-Invade-Next-Michael-Moore/dp/B01D0D3P5U/ref=sr_1_2?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1465634261&sr=1-2&keywords=where+to+invade+next

If you're brave enough to look at this film objectively you'll never again look at this place as the "land of the free".