|
Edited on Sun Apr-20-08 02:03 PM by PoliticalAmazon
The pterodactyl was a powerful flying reptile that served an important part in evolution. It successfully, and in a big way, made the transition from a - and water-dependent reptile species to a species that could fly. This greatly increased its competitiveness with other species, and held the natural-selection process at bay.
However, the earth changed, other species evolved along different paths, and cataclysmic events abruptly changed our planet's climate. The pterodactyl was unable to evolve quickly enough or in the right direction to adapt to these environmental changes and, therefore, ensure survival of the species. It lost its competitive edge, it was replaced by new species which were better suited to the new environment, and the pterodactyl as a species vanished into the fossil record.
Likewise, Hillary Clinton was a very powerful and effective political species in her time. She used the most successful tactics of other political species and combined them with her own finely honed ruthless and competitive edge.
However, after 8 years of the paleolithic policy making of BushJr/Rove, 8 years of the most unethical and destructive political tactics seen in decades, and 8 years of a president who puts their own interests ahead of the best interests of our country, Democratic Party voters no longer want the country run by someone who will do anything to win, and once in office, do anything to advance their own best interests, even at great harm to America.
Hillary as a candidate is untruthful about the policies she has supported since the beginning of the WJClinton administration, and her promised policies as president are very different from the reality of what she has supported in reality.
As the old proverb goes, “Actions speak louder than words,” and this is the reality voters have to embrace when analyzing a candidate’s potential as president of the United States.
Democratic Party voters as a whole don't want any kind of a future White House similar to Bush/Rove. The political environment has moved on. But Hillary seems unable to even see the change in the political environment, and continues on in her old tactics and old policies that are no longer competitive in the new environment.
Hillary Clinton is old in so many aspects. She uses old-style politics, and she clings to old policies. In a tactic that is more similar to older Republican politicians than it is to forward-thinking Democrats, she frequently references the days when she was young with gilt-edged hindsight. Finally, she is physically old.
But her age is the least of what makes her increasingly unable to compete in today's political environment.
It's her old-ways thinking, her old-style politics which were copied from Bush/Rove and Lee Atwater, and her old approach to important issues (which share more commonalities with BushJr's agenda than they do differences) that make her increasingly noncompetitive in the new political environment.
Hillary says she will bring our troops home, but she voted for the Iraq invasion, even when there was abundant evidence that the reasons given for the invasion were not true. She steadfastly refused to effectively work to get us out of Iraq up until the time she started the process of running for president. Because Americans have clearly indicated they want us out of Iraq, Hillary now portrays herself as always being against the war, and eager to bring our soldiers home. However, in a head-spinning twist that would make Linda Blair green with envy, within the same day of promising to bring our troops home, she will tell the world on a nationally broadcasted debate that if any Middle Eastern country attacks Israel, there will be retaliation from America via her planned "umbrella of deterence" she will place over the Middle East. This policy hardly supports her stated goal of bringing American troops home, and would exponentiate the numbers of American soldiers who would be required to fight in the Middle East. Indeed, Hillary’s “umbrella of deterrence” policy is far beyond even BushJr/Rove planned for the Middle East.
Hillary says she is (and always was) against NAFTA, despite solid evidence that she was an eager supporter. She says she will bring jobs back to America, despite the fact that she has been one of the biggest advocates for sending American jobs to India...despite the fact that she has told her India corporate clients that outsourcing of American jobs to India will always continue, and not to pay attention to the American-worker backlash against India...despite the fact that, at a $2.5million fundraiser "gala" dinner in NYC, hosted by her India corporate financial backers, in a 15-minute speech she promised them that her top priority once president would be to further cement India-U.S. relations. Here again, Hillary Clinton has gone even beyond Bush/Rove in her willingness to put her own political interests ahead of the best interests of the American people.
Outsourcing of American jobs has brought great suffering to the American people. They have suffered personally from lost jobs, and economically our nation has suffered. Americans do not want anymore American jobs outsourced, and have made it clear they want something different. Yet Hillary embraces the old policies which have proven harmful to America, and is dishonest about her actions and plans. She seems totally unable to evolve with the new political climate, and continues to put her own best interests against the best interests of the American people.
In campaign tactics, Hillary has gone beyond what even Rove/Bush dared pull in an election: she has used the race card in an attempt to appeal to the American voters who still, consciously or unconsciously, regard a person's race as a defining factor predicting their success in a job.
Hillary has surpassed Rove/Bush tactics when it comes to dishonest spin of an opponent's words to score a political "gotcha" point. Her loathesome spin of Obama's eloquent statements about how rural America has suffered and has become bitter is just one example of many that Democratic voters have seen and remember.
Many Democratic voters are fed-up with the old-style Rove/Bush politics and policies, and especially don't want their own political party stained by Hillary and her gutter-slime tactics.
That is why Hillary's approval numbers keep falling. That is also why, when asked who they believe is the most honest candidate, over 50% choose Obama, and only 30% choose Hillary Clinton.
Hillary, who has told us for two years that she is the "inevitable candidate," has seen her huge lead plummet. She has gone from "inevitable" to "the underdog" candidate.
The reason for this huge change in her political status is clear: the more voters see of her and Obama, the more they recoil from Hillary and move towards Obama.
After 8 years of the paleolithic policy making of BushJr/Rove, and 8 years of the most unethical and destructive political tactics seen in decades, Democratic Party voters no longer want the country run by someone who will do anything to win, and once in office, do anything to advance their own best interests, even at great harm to America.
Democratic Party voters as a whole don't want any kind of a future White House similar to Bush/Rove. The political environment has moved on. But Hillary, only competent in the old lie/slash/burn survival tactics, has been unable to change her political tactics and unwilling to change her polices. As a result, what she has to offer in leadership and political tactics is no longer what the environment demands.
Like the pterodactyl, a new political species is more suitable to the evolved political climate, and Hillary is suffering the harsh realities of political natural selection.
As a result, Hillary the Pterodactyl is unable to evolve, and so will be ultimately selected out of the political environment by the voters.
Natural selection is brutal and unforgiving, but the process is crucial for the survival of life forms, both physical and political. Like physical natural selection, political natural selection ensures that only the most fit and most able to compete will use the limited available resources.
Like the pterodactyl, Hillary's time has come, she thrived, but now her time is over. *Democratic Party voters uniting their votes to end this primary would ensure that the limited resources available to Democrats will be used for the victory of the Democratic Party political species in November 2008.*
As a political party, the Democrats cannot afford to allow one Democratic Party politician who is unable to compete in the new political environment doom the survival and ability to thrive of the entire Democratic Party political species.
If they do, the brutality of the natural-selection reality will be swift and sure: as a party, the Democrats will become the vanquished and forced to live off the putrid political leavings of the dominant Republican Party.
*edited for clarity
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
