Monday, January 28, 2008

Levelling the Democratic Playing Field

In the blue corner, the Clintons. In the red corner, the Kennedys.

Let's face it, if Bill Clinton had been run over by a bus a year ago, Hillary Clinton would not be where she is today in the Democratic Party's presidential race. She's always had a powerhouse in her corner, the Big Draw, Bill. Oh sure, sometimes he's put his foot in his mouth but that's not always been accidental. Backfires happen, even when they're scripted. Nonetheless it's been a campaign waged by the Two-headed Clinton.

That makes it even more surprising that the challenger, underdog Barack Obama, has done as well as he has so far with his win in Iowa and his conquest of South Carolina. He's had to run uphill while his opponent, the heir presumptive, has enjoyed the high ground advantage.

That playing field is going to be a little more even today thanks to the levelling effect of America's greatest Democratic family, the Kennedys. Caroline Kennedy, daughter of the late JFK, wrote an astonishingly emotive endorsement of Obama in the New York Times on the weekend in which she described the man as cut from the same cloth as her father. Today, the brother of that same president, Senator Ted Kennedy, will also lend his name to the Obama campaign.

I've always felt it was somewhat unseemly that the Democratic field should have to run against the Billary tag team. Maybe, just maybe, Caroline and Ted, the Kennedys, can unhorse part of the Clinton behemoth.

Without the intervention of the old man, GHWBush, and the Lee Atwater dirty tricks played by Shrub's Quasimodo, Rove, America might well have wound up in 2000 with Al Gore or John McCain as chief executive instead of having to splash around in the shallow end of the Bush gene pool for eight years. Imagine.


The Mound of Sound said...

"It's not her baggage - it's her husband's?" Look she chose to make that her baggage when she brought him in as her campaigner in chief. How many millions do you think Bill has raised to line Hillary's war chest?

"Time for equality here" - that's absolutely right. After 43 consecutive white presidents, and only white presidents, maybe it's time a non-white was given the job - just in the name of equality.

But this isn't about equality. It's about breaking a mold that has beset the United States. You may not like to hear it, but Hillary is very much part of that problem.

The Mound of Sound said...

Anon, that's a cheap shot. My opposition to Hillary isn't gender based. There are plenty of good reasons not to trust or support Mrs. Clinton. I find her feckless and less than honest. I don't think she could win against someone like John McCain and I think her candidacy would cost the Democratic Party a number of seats in Congress. And that seems to be shared by a solid 50% of the American electorate.

Tania said...

In the interest of full disclosure. I am a woman. :)

If I had a vote in the primaries, if I could do anything to make it happen, I would. I would vote for Mr. Obama.

It has nothing to do with gender or race. It has to do with the audacity to hope. It has to do what people in the United States need. To take the White House back from special interests group. To not be beholden to lobbyists. To not have to put up with the same old, same old.

Mr. Obama offers that. Ms. Clinton doesn't.

To make it an issue of race, or an issue of gender, takes away from the substance of the whole candidate.

And shame on you, anon, for being so shallow and hateful.

N said...

I am a woman too, and I wouldn't vote for someone just because they were a woman. Like men (my goodness me, how far we have come) we actually look to what is under the pretty packaging and determine what is needed to get a country off the road to nowhere. Cheap shot anon - use some real arguments.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Mound of Sound said...

Boy you're a nasty piece of work! Look anon your shrill stridency undermines your credibility. Calm down and communicate like a grown up. You do no credit to your gender or to your candidate.
What utterly eclipses the Hillary/Obama argument is the prospect of the Republicans keeping the White House.

No matter how much you admire Hillary, poll upon poll have shown that she would go down to defeat in November, losing to McCain, Romney, Huckabee - even Giuliani.

There was a woman in the running to become vice president once. How many even remember her name? I do, Ferraro, but you won't find many who can recall. She didn't advance women's presence in the executive - because the Dems lost.

I'm not going to question the element of mysogeny. Of course it's there but if Hillary wins the nomination and loses the White House it'll be a hell of a long time before another woman gets a shot.

The Mound of Sound said...

Anon, I've asked you to behave yourself but you persist in leaving angry, insulting and juvenile remarks. This isn't your site, it's mine, and I won't have your type of conduct here so I've deleted all your comments. You had contributed nothing useful to this discussion in any event. Now, please, just go back wherever you came from because I'm sure there are any number of sites where you type of remarks would be very welcome. Try those.

Anonymous said...

Hello Mound:
I sent one post to this particular blog....not two or three. Plese don't confuse me with someone else. The reason for my reply was that fact you sound high pitched when ever writing about Hillary. One more thing....I am never, ever rude. Cheers, Enna