The “Clinton Party”? Hmmmm…

Howard Fineman wrote in HuffPo today about a couple of victories yesterday in Pennsylvania.  The two candidates he wrote about got the benefit of the Big Dawg’s endorsement.  In Kathleen Kane’s case, the former president called the candidate for PA attorney general’s campaign and offered to do a fundraiser.  He pointedly did not offer to do one for her competition, Rep. Patrick Murphy, who was an early endorser of Barack Obama’s in 2008.

In another case, Rep. Jason Altmire, who stayed neutral during 2008, asked Bill for assistance and was turned down.  Altmire lost the primary last night to Clinton endorsed candidate Mark Critz, who used to work for John Murtha, an early supporter of Hillary Clinton.

Fineman says that there are actually three parties in PA, the Democrats, the Republicans and the Clintons.  The Clintons are still wildly popular there.  Then he goes on to discuss Hillary’s supposed run for the White House in 2016.  Suddenly, everyone in the media is just wild about Hillary- in four years.  But it makes me wonder, if so many people are non-plussed by Obama and can’t stand the thought of the Republicans taking over and seem to be voting for Clinton endorsed candidates, why exactly do we have to wait four years?  Just askin’, because Obama’s prospects at winning the White House are ny no means assured.    Can’t anyone in politics think out of the box anymore?

Anyway, there’s more idle speculation in the Fineman post.  Of course, it’s Fineman and the Village probably doesn’t deserve anymore recognition or propagation of its conventional wisdom.  And for all we know, the Village is just exaggerating the tense detente between the Clinton and Obama camps.  They’re bored and they’d rather stir up some animosity and watch what happens, no matter how it affects the lives of ordinary Americans.  “Let’s talk up Hillary to piss off the Obots and then, pull the rug out from all of the hopeful voters.  Won’t that be fun?”  Just another case of election year journalists trying to make the news instead of reporting on it.

Nevertheless, there is a chewy nugget of truth in yesterday’s victories and before the lefty progressive anti-Clintonites start taking credit for it, let’s pause and consider if the older generation of Pennsylvanians aren’t nostalgic for better times and whether their votes for Clinton endorsed candidates are a swipe against Barack Obama and the Democratic party pony he rode in on.

*************

Here’s another little bit from that Fineman post that had me in stitches:

Hillary’s almost stoic durability was on display recently at a State Department briefing in the Franklin Dining Room, a colossal expanse festooned with marble pillars, crystal chandeliers and oil paintings of dead diplomats.

A sensible minute past the appointed time, Hillary swept in, casually carrying a mug of tea and a sheaf of briefing papers. She wore a handsome black-and-white pantsuit, an extra-long strand of double pearls and the look of an envoy supremely confident in her role, her knowledge and her station in life. She took three questions and three questions only — they run a tight ship at State — and answered them with clipped authority. Then, with a thin, business-like smile, she turned and left the room.

“She’s not the one with the sweeping vision,” said Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution. “That’s Obama’s role. But she’s pragmatic and sensible. I’d say that she has a solid, workmanlike record.”

LOLOLOLOLOL!  {{wiping eyes, catching breath, straightening clothes}}

In other words, she’s overqualified to be Secretary of State.

Ok, I’ll take stoic durability, supreme confidence, knowledge and authority over Obama’s “sweeping vision” any day.

About these ads

13 Responses

  1. How is it exactly that “sweeping vision” guy is just so tuckered from all that vision sweeping that he requires so many rounds of golf and so many vacations while the pragmatic worker rarely gets out to do anything personal, much less have fun??? Oh, I know…BO works sooooo hard…the people know this, right?

    • Now, see, here’s where I think the right wing messaging has got it all wrong. BO undoubtably works very hard. It’s not a good idea to work as hard as he does and not get some rest. It’s bad for the thought processes to not have downtime, just ask anyone on Wall Street.
      I have a problem with what he spends his time on and how he makes policy because he either is no good at it or he’s not doing it for our benefit.
      But vacations? I’m all for them. He should take as many as he needs to feel well rested without sacrificing his duties.

  2. The Goldman-Sachs Rubinite Shitocrats want Obama in there for 4 More Years because they count on him to be the so-called “Democrat” who succeeds in pulling a Nixon-goes-to-China against Social Security and Medicare. That is Obama’s Term-Two Mission. That’s why the Wall Street CorpoRat Party wants us to wait 4 More Years. They hope to cement the slo-mo unwinding of SS and Medicare to the point where even a President HRC can not block or reverse it starting in 2016.

    If there really is a Clinton Party in Pennsylvania, I hope they devote themseves to the very last shred of time and energy to the cause of defeating Obama in Pennsylvania. I did my part, folks. I voted for Romney in the Michigan primary so now you have a non-scary non Christian Satanist on the R ticket to accept if you help get Obama defeated.

    • (And if we can get Obama defeated, then let the D & D begin. D & D not standing for Dungeons and Dragons in this case. D & D standing for De-gangrenization and Debridement.)

  3. I’ll join the Clinton party. Had more than enough O’vision in 08.

  4. As a new member of the “other side of the mountain” group-cause we don’t expect to see 114yrs- HELL YES! Waiting patiently for the day she announces again.

    • I don’t think it’s going to happen in 2016, Annie. I think 2008 was her best shot and 2012 is her next best. We have to be realistic.
      But a lot could happen between now and November. That’s why I think Clinton is warming up on the bullpen. The party may not like the prospect of losing and with Hillary ready to go, it might not have to.

  5. Oh They are stirring the pot alright. Did anyone see Frontline last night talking about the 2008 stock crash? It was good but very scary and what ticked me off is that in a not so subtle way they were blaming Clinton for the repeal of Glass-Stegall and showing him smiling while signing the bill and then splicing that with how prepared Obama was, compared to McCain, at the White House meeting McCain requested be called on how to best deal with the crisis; and coming up short.

    Also add in the occasional appearance by Barney Frank (Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae debacle) and Christopher Dodd (who told Bill that the Senate would repeal his veto over Glass-Stegall repeal) and you get they distinct impression that it was one part documentary and one part campaign ad.

    • I wish Clinton would have gone ahead and vetoed it anyway, and then let the Senate pass it over his veto. Wall Street front-Senators would have stood revealed for what they are in the harsh light of CSPAN.

      • Yep, me too. But you know, Republicans have a nasty habit of making the second pass through even nastier than the first time around. Maybe there was a bigger danger in waiting and letting Dubya sign in a revised version. {{shudder}} It was just all around bad but hardly all Clinton’s fault.
        I think the bigger mistake he made was signing on Larry Summers to advise him on anything. The guy is an asskisser who thinks rather too highly of himself and not of you.

    • The print and broadcast media have a lot invested in the CDS not to let Hillary get anywhere near the White House. They are responsible for the last eleven plus years of debacle after tragedy and are hoping that Joe and Jane Sixpack don’t wake up to that fact.

      Should she decide to run or the party come to its senses and ask her the usual gang of suspects at the NYT, WaPo, and MSNBO will go into full howl mode with the lies and slanders once again.

      Imagine an America where the WTC towers still stand and the Wall Street banksters are wearing orange jump suits as they pick up trash by the side of the road and you have a what might have been under President Al Gore if only the media did its job as the Founding Fathers envisioned.

      • If the media hadn’t made a mountian out of a blo-job and cheered Rove’s undewear drawer diving perhaps Clinton would have had the political clout to veto a bill he didn’t like.

        • It would have taken clout to prevent the Senate from overRIDing a veto. But it doesn’t take any actual clout to veto a bill. All it takes is stamping it “veto”. Now, if a President’s clout is already depleted, having a veto overriden may deplete that clout still further. That is something Presidents have to think about.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 468 other followers

%d bloggers like this: