the Hillary "Threat"
In just over 1200 hours (50 days), the most bitter, divisive, and expensive Presidential campaign in U.S. history will begin in earnest.
When the aftermath of the previous day's elections is calculated and determined, (which due to DieBold, re-districting, lawsuits, indictments, and unexpected health and death questions, could take many weeks) the "horse-race" mentality will begin to consume the media's interest, quickly overriding and underlying every political headline henceforth.
At it's center will be Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Due to her ability to raise money, her name recognition factor, her gender, her not being a Republican, and her electoral success in this century, Hillary will become the basis for every political question in the news. (Can she win?, Who can beat her?, Where does she stand on X, Y, or Z? etc.)
Which raises the most curious question of all, since her political inclinations have been well known for nearly forty years now, from her Wellesly speech, lessons learned from working on the Watergate committee to impeach Nixon, her "work" as Arkansas' First Lady, her 'extra-curricular' legal and financial activity, up to her "Co-Presidency".
If Hillary is such a serious "threat" (and she is), why hasn't the GOP made a serious effort to defeat her at the polls?
It is a simple question with an equally simple, but profound, answer.
THEY DO NOT WISH TO.
Remember George Wallace's most famous axiom? "There's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties". And even that was an understatement.
Hence, no Giuliani or Pataki, nor even some New York version of Tommy Robinson, empowered with millions of RNC dollars and truckloads of 'opposition research', has been recruited to oppose Hillary.
That is for a reason. And it is not because Karl Rove wasn't capable, or because of Rudy's personal political aspirations, Hillary's "centrist" record as a U.S. Senator, or the GOP "keeping their powder dry". Hillary's election as President of the United States in November of 2008 has been "programmed" for years. "Groomed for the slot" is the old military term. (pardon the pun) And no amount of "unforeseen" events is going to stop it from becoming reality, not even Bill's demise (which may well also be a part of the 'program'). I thoroughly expect that Bill Richardson will become Vice-President for the same reasons.
And pity those who believe that President Hillary will radically alter the policies of the current Bush Administration, for they are going to be most unpleasantly surprised. Oh yes, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth from Wall Street to the Baptist pulpits, but that also is a part of the "program". The charade of the "play fight" between the mercantile-statists of the Republican party and the socialist-statists of the Democratic party will continue on it's merry way, unabated. The Wall Streeters will benefit, as they did with Bill, from her easy-money, globalist policies and insider-information, and the Fundamentalist Preachers will reap unprecedented millions of dollars from their flocks by calling upon them to "give, give, give" in order to oppose Hillary's "sinful abominations".
And it will work like a charm, as it almost always does.
Oh you might get an increased minimum wage or some new marriage laws out of it, or perhaps even a reduction, or "redeployment" of some U.S. troops in Iraq. But it is more reasonable to expect that Madame Hillary will dutifully follow the Dame Thatcher model and 'out-bully' the 'cowboys' that preceded her. For that too, is part of the "program".
And if all that isn't depressing enough, should Hillary prove too 'disenchanting' or 'polarizing' while in office, well there's always another Bush, sufficiently aged and "groomed", waiting in the wings to, if necessary, 'restore "Integrity" to the Oval Office'. JEB will be 59 in 2012, and 63 in 2016.
But after 2 Bush's and 2 Clinton's, the American people surely would not fall for the same trick again?
You bet your ass they would. For they too have been "programmed" in order to "educate" them ever so slowly. It's enough to make you wish that someone would burn down Harvard and Yale, isn't it?
stephenhsmith
17sept2006
