Archive for April, 2007
April 30th, 2007
The media has recently noted that the Hillary presidential campaign has quietly dropped Senator Clinton’s middle name from all official communications. From now on, it’s just “Hillary Clinton for President,” the “Rodham” having been mothballed for the duration of the campaign. Clinton’s campaign claims there is no orchestrated policy of expunging “Rodham” from the candidate’s name. However, that rings about as “true” as a lot of other pronoucements emanating from the Clintons. So what gives?
The savvy Clinton political machine knows that Hillary Clinton’s best chance for getting elected president is based on branding her as a “Clinton,” whose first name happens to be Hillary. The middle name of “Rodham” is antithetical to the brand that the marketing consultants steering Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign want to construct for the consumer-voters of America. Hillary retaining her middle name makes about as much sense as Barack Obama reviving his middle name of “Hussein.”
Barack Hussein Obama versus Hillary Rodham Clinton? Not a chance, if the image gurus orchestrating both of these presidential campaigns continue to call the shots. Just another example that substance and well conceived ideas are totally redundant to the political elites who are shaping the 2008 presidential campaign. It really is far more about names than ideas, except the names that are in the middle. With thinking like that dominating the highest level of discourse among political strategists in the United States, the American people can rest assured about their future.
April 29th, 2007
America’s self-indulgent corporate media arrived at a near-unanimous consensus as to who came off with the best answer during the recent Democratic presidential candidates debate in South Carolina. It was Senator Biden. Now, as Biden chairs the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, you would expect that the answer would have involved an intelligent exposition on a major international challenge facing America, such as the catastrophic war in Iraq. Well, if that’s your expectation, you expected too much. The Biden response that so impressed the most illustrious media commentators was the single word, “yes.” That, in response to a question about how he would reassure the American people that he would not be overly-verbose as president.
That media celebration over a three letter word from a candidate demonstrated the crass superficiality that the American media serves up to the American people as their “coverage” of the 2008 presidential campaign. Phoney baloney is fed to the public as caviar. No wonder that such pompous superficialities as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are the front-runners in this race.
In my view, this superficiality is critical to Hillary Clinton’s success. As long as a nobody, a junior senator from Illinois with virtually no meaningful leadership experience or track record, is presented by the media as the only serious challenger to Hillary’s goal of getting the Democratic presidential nomination, I don’t see how Hillary Clinton can fail in her plans to become America’s 44th president.
April 27th, 2007
The dull, symbiotic chorus described as the Democratic candidates debate that occurred the other day in South Carolina will be forgotten by the world 6 months from now. Partisans of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will each claim that their respective candidate performed brilliantly. However, of all the candidates present, Hillary Clinton is the one most attuned to the real stuff that wins elections, and it is all happening largely unseen by the American public, while the media continues to be obsessed with non-news such as a pedantic debate.
On the same day that South Carolina got its 15 minutes of Warhohlesque fame, it was revealed that the Chief Executive of investment and banking giant Morgan Stanley, John Mack, would be endorsing Hillary Rodham Clinton for president. This is significant in a number of important ways for the outcome of the 2008 presidential election.
In the first place, John Mack is a registered Republican, who raised a lot of money for George W. Bush in his presidential campaigns.The fact that he is defecting to Hillary Clinton means that smart, savvy big-money moguls believe that the Republicans will be thrown out of the White House in 2008, and Hillary Clinton will be elected America’s 44th president. Acccordingly, they want to line up early in support of the Clinton political machine, so as to ensure that they will have easy access to a Hillary White House.
Secondly, as this blog has pointed out before, Hillary Clinton has been quietly collecting important political endorsements, while the media has been distracted by Obama-mania. The Mack endorsement means that big Wall street money is now beginning to line up with Senator Clinton, ensuring that her fundraising will continue to grow.
A final factor is that when the CEO of a major investment firm endorses a candidate for president, that decision is as strategic and busineslike as any other deliberation they undertake. Mack’s endrosment of Hillary Clinton makes clear that big money is not fooled by the superficial hype over Obama. However, expect the media to take a long time to catch up with reality, while the Clintons continue to execute their well-conceived plan to retake the White House for their unique style of government.
April 25th, 2007
While Donald Rumsfeld, as Secretary of Defense, was visiting American troops in Iraq, he was bombarded with indignation over the poor preparation for war. One soldier confronted Rumsfeld, pointing out that vehicles had not been armored for protection against roadside bombs, and the soldiers of the world’s wealthiest military power had to resort to scrounging for scrap metal to improve the poor protection offered by their humvees. Rumsfeld replied with typical insensitivity, “You go to war with the army you have.” That meant Bill Clinton’s army.
The Bush administration will be held accountable by history for plunging the nation into an unecessary and catastrophic war. However, the Clintons also bear responsibility. Hillary Clinton, of course, voted to authorize George W. Bush to launch an unprovoked attack on Iraq without requiring a congressional declaration of war. However, there is another angle to the complicity of the Clintons in the Iraq debacle. It goes to the heart of Hillary and Bill’s uncomfortable relationship with the U.S. military.
When Bill Clinton assumed the presidency, the United States Army could deploy 16 combat divisions in the field. It was this force structure that enabled the first President Bush to launch the successful Operation Desert Storm in 1991, which pushed the Iraqi army out of Kuwait. However, when Bill and Hillary Clinton left office, they transfered to the second Bush an army severely diminished in power and that could only deploy 10 combat divisions. In effect, Bill Clinton reduced the power of the American army by almost half. This meant the army could not hope to match the same deployment that was successfull against Iraq in 1991.
Among President Bush’s many faults, I blame him for thinking he could successfully go to war with Bill Clinton’s army, without first affecting a major restoration of its force structure. The ultimate question, however, is what Hillary Clinton’s army might look like. I shudder to contemplate the possibilities.
April 24th, 2007
As this blog has repeatedly pointed out, while the bulk of the media is fixated on the perceived challenge of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton is quietly but methodically collecting political endorsements. The latest major political figure to endorse Hillary is Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski. While many ambitious male politicians have also been lining up under the banner of the Clinton dynasty, the endorsement by Mikulski points to another plan of Hillary Clinton’s that is unfolding. Alongside Mikulski’s expression of support for fellow Senator Hillary Clinton, some 500 prominent New Hampshire women also went public with their endorsement of Clinton.This points to the excution of a very deliberate strategy.
As a growing number of women’s organizations line up behind Hillary Rodham Clinton, they are bringing with them more than just public relations or fundraising capacity. They also provide a vast network of committed volunteers, who will mobilize women to vote in large numbers for Senator Clinton.
Hillary’s political advisors know the demagraphics of the 2008 presidential election by rote. They recognize that substantially more women than men will be voting in the primaries and general election. If Hillary succeeds in capturing a commanding portion of the female vote, her path to the Democratic nomination and eventually the White House is virtually assured. It is this implementation of a very deliberate strategy, and not the ephemeral early poll numbers or early fundraising results that the media pundits should be analyzing. However, cogent analysis seems so far in short supply in this bizarre, upcoming 2008 presidential election.
April 23rd, 2007
Leap-frogging over Al Gore’s environmental credentials, Hillary Clinton has made Earth Day an opportuntity to position herself as the environmental presidential candidate. She even boasts that on Earth Day her campaign will be “carbon neutral.” That must mark the first time that the Clintons have adopted a position of neutrality as being in their political self-interest.
There seems to be no limit to the capacity of pandering and tilting to any whim by Hillary Clinton, in her passion to take on the mantle of the presidency for herself. However, when the environment was not a hot political issue with the public, where was Hillary Rodham Clinton? Where was William Jefferson Clinton? Well, some people in Arkansas knew where the Clintons were on the enviromental question.
At the time Bill Clinton was beginning his term as governor in Arkansas, lawyer Hillary Clinton had a side activity underway. She took $1,000 of her own money, and in ten months, by trading in commodities, she generated a profit of $100,000 from that mere thousand bucks. Now, how does a lady with no prior experience in commodities trading generate a return on investment of 10,000 percent in only 10 months? Perhaps with a little help from friends of the Clintons. One of these “advisors” to Hillary on commodity trading was the chief outside counsel for Tyson Foods Inc. Coincidentally, while Billl Clinton was Arkansas governor, he compromised on state enviromental policies in a way that was of benefit to Tyson Foods. Not exactly carbon neutral, I would say.
Readers of this blog who want to discover more about Hillary’s commodity trading should pick up a copy of my book, “Hillary Clinton Nude,” and read the chapter entitled “Hundred Thousand Dollar Lady.”
So, fellow Americans, on the environment, as with so many other important issues, we have Hillary Clinton engaging in theatrics to “prove” that she really does have a particular conviction, when reality betrays only selfish and self-centered personal calculation.
April 22nd, 2007
Senator Hillary Clinton is milking her husband’s popularity for everything it is worth, as a counterforce to the perceived charisma of rival candidate Barack Obama. Now she has let it be know that as president, she would appoint her “significant other” as kind of a special roving world ambassador.
In the United States, ambassadorships are seen as the ultimate patronage appointment, typically awarded to supporters who have done a great job of fundraising on behalf of the presidential candidate. By that criteria, Bill Clinton is certainly entitled to a stellar ambassadorship, should wife Hillary make it into the Oval Office.
If indeed Hillary Clinton is elected the nation’s 44th president, and appoints Bill Clinton as her special ambassador, I hope she will at least keep him away from international conferences involving the theme of sexual harrassment and exploitation of female employees. We can certainly have patronage without an overdose of hypocratic theatrical gestures.
April 20th, 2007
So now we can add the Democrat mayor of St. Louis to the growing list of ambitious politicians who are lining up in support of the Clinton political machine in 2008. While the media issues a plethora of contradictory (and meaningless) poll numbers, those Democrat politicos, presumably with more facts than the superficial poll numbers, are throwing their support behind Hillary Clinton. What is the significance of this political phenomenon?
Any Democrat politician with a desire for upward mobility knows that sitting out the race for the presidential nomination in 2008 is not an option. While not a single major Party politician has yet endorsed Barack Obama, or any other rival of Hillary’s, Senator Clinton is already counting her endorsements by the dozen. These ambitious politicans know that the facts on the ground, as opposed to media hype for Obama, show an overwhelming electoral advantage for Hillary Clinton. And as more endorsements are collected, that perception of advantage grows.
Media pundits claim that Hillary’s vaunted “aura of inevitability” was eliminated by the impressive fundraising performance of neophyte senator Barack Obama. However, politicians in the know seem to be suggesting that there is an inevitable nominee in the Democratic Party, and they are backing up their supposition, as well as long-range career planning, with their endorsements of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
April 18th, 2007
Confused about all those polls about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? I don’t blame you. In the same week we have had two major national polls, one showing Hillary’s lead over Barack narrowing, while the other shows the complete opposite result, namely that Hillary Clinton’s lead is growing. All this goes to show how meaningless and contrived these early poll numbers are.
There is a very funny movie from a number of years back called “Beer.” In the film, a brewing company owner speaks about what the most important ingredient of a great beer is. It is not the malt or the hops; it’s the adverstising.
What should be watched in this formative period of the 2008 presidential campaign is which candidate is doing best in putting together the advertising that will impact poll numbers in the weeks before the 2008 primary elections. All the evidence points to Hillary Clinton and her senior campaign advisor, one former president named Bill Clinton, putting together the potent marketing machine that any candidate requires to secure a political party’s presidential nomination. Senator Clinton is collecting endorsements like crazy, which translate into advertising appearances during the actual primary campaigns. The political marketers and advertising specialists are being snatched up by the Clinton machine to a greater extent than her rivals. These are the key metrics to watch right now. However, for the most part the media thinks explaining these metrics is too intense for the average American, so you will have to continue to feast upon the meaningless and contradictory poll numebrs.
April 15th, 2007
I heard a funny comment from one of the late night T.V. talk shows about Hillary Clinton. After Hillary announces she is going to meet with the Rutgers University women’s basketball team in relation to the Imus controversy, Bill Clinton announces he’s going to meet with the Rutgers University women’s volleyball team, and women’s hockey team, and women’s swimming team.”
Well, we get the point. However, this does go beyond humor, and points to an unpredictable vulnerability within Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Based on Bill Clinton’s past behavior, e.g. Monicagate, what assurance does Hillary Clinton have that her over-sexed husband will be able to keep his libido in check, and refrain from doing something really stupid involving another woman?
Bill Clinton is both Hillary’s greatest strength and most dangerous weakness. She would be nowhere politically without him. And yet, his unrestrained desire for gratification could cripple her front-runner status in the presidential race. Should we surmise that Hillary Clinton, who is methodical if nothing else, has left nothing to chance?
We can assume that Bill has promised Hillary Clinton that he will be on his best behavior during the campaign, and quench any looming desire for self-destructive behavior with a quick cold shower. However, I suspect Hillary Clinton has a plan B. If Bill does do some womanizing that compromises Hillary Clinton’s lifelong pursuit of the presidency, don’t be surprised if Senator Clinton dumps Bill in some bold manner, and then goes after the sympathy vote. It may even work.
Previous Posts
