Let us please stipulate that in a rational world, a woman like Hillary Rodham Clinton would have absolutely no chance of being nominated for, much less elected, president of the United States. She has achieved nothing, accomplished nothing (unless you count the four dead Americans at Benghazi, for which she will ultimately be held responsible); she is an exremely poor public speaker, full of annoying verbal and physical tics; she is legendarily dishonest; she is a hard-core Alinskyite; and in general a wretched human being. By rights, she should be laughed off the stage, the same way the smart set laughed at Lurleen Wallace, who succeeded her husband George Wallace, the racist Democrat, as governor of Alabama back in 1967. She has no natural political constituency, except the manufactured “women’s vote,” and no rationale for her candidacy except that it’s “time” for a woman president, just as it was “time” for a part-black African, part-Arab, half-white, paternally cultural Muslim to pass for a traditional African-American Christian and be elected president in 2008.
And yet, even after the comically disastrous and transparently phony launch of her new “campaign,” she’s considered the “inevitable” Democrat nominee for 2016 and, very likely, the next president of the United States. For the sake of democracy in America, she needs to be defeated and politically destroyed. Break Hillary and you have begun to break the power of the Mainstream Media, a fifth column masquerading as the Fourth Estate whose mission it has been for decades to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America.
For the only reason an HRC candidacy is even plausible is the influence of the legacy media, which has simply declared, by fiat, her suitability and her inevitability. You may recall that the MSM did the same thing in the run-up to 2008, until their dreamboat, Obama, came along and gave the aging Baby Boomers, who had dreamed of exactly this moment since 1968, a reason to push the female candidate to the back of the bus in order to celebrate the only kind of “diversity” they advocate, which is racial.
It didn’t matter to the Racialist Left that Obama had exactly nothing to do with the authentic black American experience — he was not from a slave background, he grew up in largely racially colorblind Hawaii where his skin color matched that of the vast majority of the island’s population, and his mother was as white as, well, Kansas. (Like Obama, I grew up in part in Hawaii, and can relate from first-hand experience that the only people actively discriminated against in those days were “white” people.) But in choosing to send young Barry to the Punahou School — where the Anglo elite had long sent their progeny — his parents, or handlers, found the one school in the islands where he could feel racially aggrieved.
In short, his “blackness” was essentially manufactured in order to sell him to the media and then to a good-hearted American public as a plausible black candidate in a way that, say, Jesse Jackson was (in their view) not. Harry Reid inadvertently let the cat out of the bag away when he remarked that Obama had “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” In other words, Obama was not threateningly black, a racist view Joe Biden endorsed when he called him “articulate and clean.”
In case you missed it, Joe Biden is now the vice president of the United States.
But back to Hillary and what amounts to the MSM’s own campaign to keep itself in power. For that is what it is. Despite its occasional displeasure when Barry fails to walk on water, the atheist, anti-American Left could not conceivably have supported anyone else during his elegibility. But now that he is constitutionally prohibited from running for president again (one hopes; you never know how the weak-minded and easily intimidated John Roberts would vote, should it come to that), a Hillary! candidacy is, at the moment, the next best thing to a third Obama term, despite the animosity between the two camps. When it comes to swaying elections, there are “no enemies to the Left” — although perhaps the Clintons should ask themselves how well that worked out for Kerensky in Russia.
Does Lady Macbeth wish to be president? Of course she does. She just doesn’t want to work for it, just as she has never worked for anything in her life; despite her political ineptitude, she feels it is her due. She has been a committed Frankfurt School cultural vandal since her student days at Wellesley, where she wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky, “There Is Only the Fight.” [Full text of the thesis at the link.] That repellent document begins strangely, and in light of recent reports about Hillary’s sexuality, tellingly:
Although I have no “loving wife” to thank for keeping the children away while I wrote, I do have many friends and teachers who have contributed to the process of thesis-writing. And I thank them for their tireless help and encouragement. In regard to the paper itself, there are three people who deserve special appreciation: Mr. Alinsky for providing a topic, sharing his time and offering me a job; Miss Alona E. Evans for her thoughtful questioning and careful editing that clarified fuzzy thinking and tortured prose; and Jan Krigbaum for her spirited intellectual companionship and typewriter rescue work.
(You can read all about the moral — I use the word “satanic — evil of the Frankfurt School in my forthcoming book, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace, out from Encounter Books this summer; for more on Alinsky, please consult Rules for Radical Conservatives, written under my pen name, “David Kahane.”)
This introduction alone should send real Americans screaming from the voting booth. But the Hillary! candidacy isn’t about appealing to voters, or changing hearts and minds, or offering the country a genuinely new way forward from the loathsomeness of Obama and Obamaism. Instead, it’s about (contra this Politico story) perpetuating Obamaism, with a few tweaks here and there so to be able to pretend that Hillary! represents enough of a break with the recent past that voters won’t have to, you know, vote for those grubby Republicans.
While the sample size is small, no retiring president below 50 percent job approval nationally has passed the White House to his party’s nominee in the 75 years of the polling era. Obama’s approval rating, as of this writing, is around 45 percent (give or take), and his disapproval is about 50 percent. That’s not impressive, though it is up a bit from the low 40s where Obama was mired in national approval polling at the time of last year’s midterm election. There isn’t a precise, absolute relationship between incumbent presidential approval and the election results. However, it’s a solid indicator of the likely outcome.
Perhaps that might have been true under the normal American electoral system. But as Obama has proven, the old rules no longer apply. He should never have been elected, but he was. He really should never have been re-elected, but he was. He should not be able to pass on the Democrat mantle to a successor, but he might, whether it’s to Hillary! or Fauxcahontas Warren or some other nonentity we haven’t met yet. It almost doesn’t matter: the next Democrat candidate will come from the extreme left wing of a left-wing party, will automatically garner 47 percent of the votes, will have New York, Illinois and California in the Electoral College bag long before voting begins, and will need only a relative handful of votes in a few swing states to perpetuate the current administration’s baleful philosophy.
In fact, the Left is counting on it. At the time Harry Reid invoked the “nuclear option” and cut the GOP’s filibuster legs out from underneath it, I wrote at National Review Online that the Democrats were acting like they never expected to lose an election again. In fact, they did lose the election of 2014 — a temporary setback that has not affected one whit the Republican Party’s cringing servility. And should they retain control of the White House — having established the apparently overriding governing principle of “executive orders” — then the Rubicon of American representative democracy will have been well and truly crossed.
In its black heart, the legacy media would probably prefer to see someone other than Hillary! run; they understand her many and manifest weaknesses as a candidate and would rather not take the chance with her. And why should they? Whomever they anoint will begin his or her day with the editorial pages of the New York Times, and then go about the ongoing business of dismantling the nation as founded, one brick at a time. They think they have all the time in the world, and given the lack of opposition, maybe they do.