Maybe she’ll be ready on Day One to sign another NAFTA agreement, eh? Like she did before, during the First Ladyship for which she is (sometimes) taking credit as part of her whole "I’m so experienced" rap. Before, that is, she called for a time-out (do they have free-trade in cookies and milk?) from the policy she jammed down the throats of her own country, and especially her own Party and its constituents. Is this the agenda for Day Two?

How ‘bout that foreign policy acumen, too? The Clintons, man, they’re nothing if not cheeky. I’m surprised Chelsea isn’t just some kind of giant human cheek rolling around in a Monty Python movie, given her DNA. What kind of gall does a person have to have to call your opponent unready to be commander-in-chief after the very best case you can make for your Iraq vote is that you were duped worse than an 1870s Kansas farm boy at the traveling circus? That, of course, is an outrageous lie anyhow, and the truth – that she voted for war as a ticket to the White House – is actually infinitely worse (which is why it is also equally well hidden). But just for the hell of it, forget about that and just take her at her word. Most all of the world’s population, including half the Democrats in Congress, knew Bush was heading directly to war, and was lying profusely about his motives for the invasion. Do we really want a president who couldn’t figure that one out? Or one who has the nerve to even show her face for a debate on foreign policy five years later? Is this what she means when she says "I’m tested"? Question: Are you still "tested" if you failed the test abysmally?

I’m sorry, but if Hillary Clinton has foreign policy experience, then I’m Henry Kissinger. And since I really, really don’t want to be Henry Kissinger, I’d only write that if I felt damn confident that she didn’t have any to speak of. You could, of course, count that time she was knocking back vodkas with John McCain in Estonia. Personally, I don’t really wanna know what happened in that little vignette. Unless they got a little randy while the spouses were back at home. In which case, I really don’t wanna know.

Meanwhile, please forgive me for being impertinent, but I’m told that it takes a wee bit of organizational skill and management experience to run something as vast and recalcitrant as the United States federal government. The biggest thing that Hillary has ever run is her presidential campaign, and all she’s done with that is run it into the ground. This race was her to lose, and she has. And not just because she’s a lousy candidate with no message other than "Restore the Queen", either. Her campaign has been, in addition, a true management disaster. The Obama people have out-organized, out-hustled and out-smarted the feeble Clinton brain-trust every step of the way. It’s hard for the mind to even imagine how ineffective someone like this would be at the much bigger task of being president. Unless, of course, you happen to have lived through the 1990s.

Many people have wondered why the Clintons have run such an abysmal campaign in general, and why, in specific, they can’t seem to do anything else besides continually play the experience card and carp on Obama for absurdly insignificant supposed transgressions like plagiarism or his kindergarten transcripts (they’re joking, right?). The answer is simple, though. There’s nothing else for them to do. They did the emotion thing. That bought a few delegates. They did the race thing. That lost a slew of delegates. They sent Bill out there and all he managed to do was to remind people that the only thing a Clinton ever cares about is himself. What else is there? There are few political differences between the two candidates, to the point where Hillary’s attempts at making a federal case about his healthcare plan’s deviations from hers only seem comical and desperate. Because they are. Meanwhile, at a personal level, he’s charismatic, she’s not. He’s got integrity, she doesn’t. He attracts independent and even Republican voters, she repels them and would go into the general election already way in the hole. He’s not a Clinton, she is. No wonder she plays the faux experience card. It’s the only difference between the two of them that doesn’t immediately redound in Obama’s favor, even if it’s completely bogus anyhow.

And no wonder it’s all been falling apart for them. Americans are only stupid some of the time, and she seems to have caught the wrong point in the cycle. Hillary has now lost the last eleven contests in a row, always offering some excuse for why this one didn’t count or that one wasn’t really a fair test. It’s gotten so bad that a week or two ago even Bubba admitted that if she doesn’t win Ohio and Texas, she’s through. Despite the fact that that was already the understatement of the century, now the New York Times is reporting that in fact they’ll keep on campaigning even if they lose both states.

They quote Hillary as saying, "I think what’s important is that we have a lot of people yet to vote". No, you don’t think that at all, Hillary. What you think is important is that you become president. Period. Indeed, you think it’s so important that you keep discounting the people who already have voted.

Enough already. For god’s sake. Enough.

Directly following her little "celestial choir" embarrassment, Hillary had this to say: "Maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and have the special interests disappear".

I’ll refrain from commenting on whether or not she’s lived too long, despite the destruction wrought by her family.

But I will say this: You are the specialiest of special interests, Hillary. It’s all about you, and it’s always been all about you. The rest of us can just be damned as we watch you joyride our hijacked nation yet again, right?

Well, I’ve got a better idea. How ‘bout waving your magic wand, after all, and making the worst special interest of them all disappear instead?

 1  |  2