Hey Bill! Ease it up, buddy. Is it not already enough that most lockstep Democrats idolize you like delusional those-were-the-days Republicans fawn at the feet of (the former) Ronald Reagan? In a rather bizarre affront to the necessity of a united Democratic Party in the wake of a crucial election, ex-Prez
Clinton is ostensibly attempting to steal the thunder from the possibility of Obama’s being the first African-American president in
United States history. Apparently we’re debating the meaning of African-American now. It’s not about race, it’s about attitude…or the ease with which you can kiss black babies on the campaign trail. Or the ability to dance.
I won’t claim to be a Clintonographer, but this just seems so strange to me. Now, I’ve heard/read conservative pundits and bloggers piss and moan about the Clinton Machine, as if it stands on par with Rovian politics, but, really, what’s with the blasé dismissal of Obama as just a “fairy tale”? As if a presidential couple isn’t fairy tale enough.
Bill suddenly took on the role of the overbearing Jewish mother, eschewing any sullen soul who dares question his over-qualified daughter, or wife. Whatever. Honestly, I sympathize with Hilldog on this one. Bill might as well interrupt Hillary mid-speech to wipe some smeared gunk off her cheek with a hanky, then uppishly admonish the audience, or else…
I guess I’ve got some beef with folks who hoist Bill up on a majestic pedestal like good-old-boy Republicans fantasize about breakfast with Reagan. To me, it comes across as another mild form of hypocrisy, because I guarantee that the nostalgic Clintonites are the ones who detest the larger-than-life fiction that is Ronald Reagan. So, they want their own blow-up doll. Hell, things were good when Bill was prez, let’s worship.
Yes, Clinton’s presidency ushered in a newfound prosperity, a truly proud moment for America, but don’t ignore the contretemps (I’m not necessarily referring to the Lewinsky hubbub, that was just ridiculous.) He lied, it was stupid. He lost the public trust. BUT, all I’m saying is, let’s try to do better. It’s a bit trite, but, think progress. Otherwise, you get stuck in the hallucination that everything was better way back when, and I hate that. Let’s keep the wheels turning and move on to something greater, and if Hillary truly is the answer to that cry for help, then so be it. Just don’t bullshit me that the first female U.S. president would be a bigger deal than the first African-American male president. You’re just splitting split ends.
2 comments:
When I heard about that "fairy tale" comment on TV, I saw the three-second clip of Clinton uttering the phrase in question and then the talking heads went at it. There was a back and forth about whether he was talking about Obama's candidacy as a whole or just something to do with his position on Iraq. I didn't think Bill Clinton would say that about Obama's candidacy. But I was still perplexed why he would use that language about a difference in views on Iraq (I assumed it was a policy or strategy difference). But I just checked to see what the context was. After seeing that, if everything he says leading up to the comment is true, then I think he has a valid point. But that's only if.
You know, after watching the clip again I do agree with your assessment, assuming it is all factual. But, what induced a reaction in me was his string of these ostensibly passive barbs at Obama. After the South Carolina primary he brushed aside Obama's victory by comparing it Jesse Jackson's SC victories in the 84 and 88 presidential campaigns - implying that Obama would falter just as Jackson had. Now, that comment is also sketchy because you can bust out the race card, but I just can't imagine Bill intending to lump the campaigns together based on race. Nonetheless, I guess my reaction was spurred by his unprecedented role in this campaign - that of an ex-president stumping for his wife. I suppose I expected him to show a bit more restraint since this is merely the Democratic primaries. However, I read NY Times article that basically said that if either of the nominees can survive a harsh internal vetting from their own party, then it bolsters their prospects in the general election. Thanks for the comment Jay
Post a Comment