As for Hillary, I'm still trying to figure out how a person who failed tremendously at overhauling healthcare in her husband's first term intends to be successful the second time around. I'm also trying to figure out where all this experience she supposedly has comes from -- she was in the EAST WING during HER HUSBAND'S presidency, not the West Wing. Unless you've actually been the president, I don't think you should be able to claim you have experience being a president. It's just not the same as any other job any of the candidates has ever had before--obviously. Nothing really can prepare a person for it, and the best we can hope for in a leader are good management skills, integrity, and intelligence. End of story. (For more on this see
Maureen Dowd's latest article). Judging by the way Hillary has run her campaign, I can't see how she's going to run a country. Her loyalty to people simply because they're loyal to her, whether or not they're the right or best person for the job sounds eerily familiar (who will her Dick Cheney be, I wonder?). But is it any surprise she'd value loyalty above all else? Perhaps if she'd gotten it from her husband she wouldn't have to compensate for it elsewhere.Her tactics before the New Hampshire primary, as well as a couple of other instances in which she's shed a tear or two, makes me wonder if, should she become president, she will cry to get what she wants. Will Monsieur Sarkozy have to make sure he has clean hankies in his pocket whenever they meet? Is that what she learned being married to Bill Clinton for most of her adult life? Has she worn the mantle of victim for so long it's become her identity? I honestly suspect she's addicted to sympathy. She is so used to people feeling sorry for her, she's learned to use it to her advantage. Chris Matthews got in trouble suggesting such a thing, but there was a undeniable hint of defensiveness from his critics as they rallied to Hillary's defense.
I'm just hoping Obama gives her a real reason to cry very soon by destroying the ambition she's been clinging to all the years she's been putting up with her philandering husband's hi-jinx. I wonder if she ever asks herself was worth it--being a doormat in the hope's she'd someday be president? (Oh, yes, she's a feminist's ray of sunshine all right. I might be voting for her if she'd left Bill in 1998). All I can tell for sure is she'll apparently do or say anything for power. She's a Clinton. And what is a Clinton without power? Maybe it's time we found out.
