Hillary Clinton Prepares To Be Unfair, Like Bill
Klein tries to peddle the same kind of nonsense when, in a column out today, he claims Sen. Barack Obama is all inspiration and Sen. Hillary Clinton "knows more," and is all substance. He ignores Hillary's polarizing qualities, and says it's inconsequential that Obama says the U.S. must try to go on with less divisiveness and partisanship in government.
Why is Time allowing such a crass man, in league with the Clinton power grab, to write a column? Has it forgotten that the press is a public trust?
As we move along in the struggle for the Democratic presidential nomination, it is becoming ever clearer that the Clintons will do anything they feel is necessary to try to restore themselves to power, probably so that they can give more Marc Rich-style pardons and cater, for a price, to the dictator of Kazazhstan and a Canadian mining magnate, as the New York Times outlined Bill Clinton did, for $31 million for his charitable foundation, in a front-page story last week.
Now, Clinton, realizing that she may come into the convention with fewer delegates than Obama, is preparing to play unfair.
One instance of this is her argument that Florida and Michigan, which broke the rules set by the
Democratic National Committee and moved their primaries up, only to be stripped of their delegates to the convention, should now get those delegates anyway.
Since Clinton was the only one to break the agreement made by all the candidates at the time, and campaign in the extra-legal Michigan and Florida primaries, thereby accumulating the only substantive vote, naturally she would inherit these delegates and gain an advantage at the convention, even if she continues to lose more of the primaries and caucuses, as she did Tuesday night in 13 separate states.
This is yet another Clinton power grab. I'm not opposed to holding out an option to Michigan and Florida for the restoration of their delegates , but only on condition they hold new primaries in which both Obama and Clinton are able to compete.
The Clintons and their supporters also are now arguing that Obama's victories in states, like Alaska and North Dakota, which have seldom voted Democratic, are not as legitimate, that the delegates are not as valid, as those from states where Clinton has won that vote Democratic all the time.
But this misses the whole point of the Obama campaign -- that, more important than having red states and blue states, it is vital that we recognize this is the United States, and that our elected leaders must appeal to and serve all the people in all the states. Obama went to Boise, Idaho, to campaign the other day, and, as a result scored a major victory in Idaho on Super Tuesday. Clinton didn't bother to go.
To Hillary and Bill Clinton, the thugs he pardoned at the end of his presidency are more important than the states of Alaska, North Dakota and Idaho. Maybe, they'd sell them out to the dictator in Kazakhstan, if he only made a contribution to Bill Clinton's "charitable foundation."
Hillary Clinton may have been on firmer ground when she lent herself $5 million to remain in the presidential race. It's a recognition that Obama has raised millions of dollars on the Internet to finance his campaign, from 650,000 small givers, while Clinton has gone the legal limit with most of her own big donors, and has comparatively less appeal to small donors. (However, later today, the Clinton campaign claimed it has raised $6.5 million in the last 24 hours from "tens of thousands" of donors, and said the staff had gone back on a paid status).
This is all fine, that like former Gov. Mitt Romney, the Clintons use part of their own fortune to try to take the country for a ride. But it would be good to know just what the origins of the $5 million (the New York Times suggests they may soon have to make a second loan) have been. Clinton-hater Dick Morris, a former Clinton aide in the White House, says he has heard the money comes from the Emir of Dubai. But there is no proof of such a wild allegation, and even Bill O'Reilly, no Clinton lover, on the Fox News Network last night chastised Morris for spreading rumors.
Obama, the brilliant former head of the Harvard Law Review, who Joe Klein characterizes as all inspiration and little substance, seems to have built a self-sustaining campaign, financed by all his small donors, bringing in $32 million just last month and another $5.8 million just in the 24 hours since Super Tuesday, while the Clinton rely just on what? We need to know, since when the Clintons came to the White House they, so far as we knew at the time, were not wealthy, and they have since become very wealthy. Maybe, it was all due to high-priced public speaking. But maybe not.
We ought to open the books on the Clintons, even before they try to steal the nomination at the Democratic National Convention.
Certain of the comments below, claiming the Clintons are not corrupt, are reminiscent of the defenders of Richard Nixon: They couldn't hit water, if they fell out of a boat.
Labels: Presidential campaigning