Clinton Concedes Future; Argues Over Past
by The Bagof Health and Politics
Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 07:25:31 PM PST
There is a purpose to her MLK comment. It was meant to undercut comparisons that were being made after Iowa. Cynical politics at its worst; hopefully we choose the future over the past.
Hillary Clinton is defending her attack on Barack Obama and Martin Luther King. Clinton argued that the triumphs of the Civil Rights Movement didn’t happen because of King, but instead happened because of President Lyndon Johnson. Clinton has been backtracking from her remarks ever since she deliberately belittled the Civil Rights leader. But, this morning, she added gas to the fire by saying, "King did more than make speeches," another veiled attack on Senator Obama.
Many people wonder what is the purpose of this. I know; a friend of mine is involved with the Edwards campaign. I e-mailed this friend the day after Iowaand said, "Edwards gave it a good shot, but I don’t see how anybody can beat Obama." This friend of mine replied immediately. My friend said, "You might be right. That speech was MLKesque." Clinton, knowing that she is an inadequate leader, has turned to old divisions in a desperate bid to hang onto power. And in so doing, she is undermining the work of "one of the people (she) admire(s) most," Dr. King, as she knows. And for what?
Hillary Clinton was a major player in her husband's administration. Hillary Clinton knows that she has achieved nothing of substance over the past 16 years. Health care reform bit the dust because of her arrogance. The War in Iraq happened, in part, because of her vote. She hasn’t authored any major bills in 8 years in the Senate. She was a key player in her husband’s failed administration: NAFTA, corporate greed where executives pay themselves 400 times the salary of the American worker, Defense of Marriage Act, Welfare Reform, etc, all happened on the Clintons’ watch. Many Americans are seeing their jobs be shipped over sees today—her husband, and to some extent Hillary herself, are responsible for that. The status quo—as it was defined by Ronald Reagan—was pretty comfortable in the 1990s.
Hillary Clinton doesn’t want us to focus on these things. She insists that "she has been a change agent for 35 years," but no major changes for the better have happened in that time period. The Equal Rights Amendment stalled. Reagan began dismantling social programs the helped those in need; Bill Clinton finished it. College tuition became unaffordable to working Americans. Pell grants started to only pay a fraction of what was needed to educate the brightest young minds without money. America became stratified.
In a stratified America, it is easy to forget that we are all one people. Barack Obama came along and reminded us of that fact. Obama’s soaring oratory is more than pleasing to the ear, it is inspirational—something neither Clinton can be. The reminders of the good book, which are Obama’s subtexts, do a lot to cleanse a society of division and stratification. A tax cut for the wealthy that would ensure re-election doesn’t look so great to a tycoon when she is reminded of the words, "I am my brother’s keeper; I am my sister’s keeper."
Clinton’s negative attacks have a single purpose: to turn this into a traditional campaign. If the Democratic Primary becomes a traditional campaign, she has a chance of winning. If the Democratic Primary follows the new kind of hopeful, optimistic and clean politics that Senator Obama espouses, then Clinton is dead in the water. By attacking Martin Luther King, Clinton started an argument about the past. Barack Obama has already won the argument about the future—and it is why he deserves the Democratic Nomination for President.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/13/221418/388/948/436364
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
