"It's the Clintons, stupid." That answers the question, "what will be national center stage if Hillary gets nominated"? Or course, if HC keeps pumping out unforced errors (book tour gaffes, lies they exited the WH "dead broke," or this week's zero-upside, personal email kerfuffle), look for descent in the handicapping to "it's the stupid Clintons."
Move over phony Benghazi, Bill's folly with zipless sex and stained dresses, or HC's sham bravery on the tarmac: the "presumptive" Democratic nominee grabs star billing in her own rousing series, "The Hero of a Thousand Escapes." What other celebrity political duo instantly transforms any election into melodrama at best, family intrigue at worse, rife with influence peddling, suspect donations, policy failures (NAFTA, health care), strategic blunders (Libya, Syria, China), and bungled secrecy that inevitably gets unmasked?
The greatest downside to President Hillary is elevation of first female whose gender novelty promises no jolts to the grievous status quo nor confrontation to the plutocracy that funds it (and her). By and large, Obama's donor base reflected regional Midwest interests (finance, farming, seed companies, nuclear energy). Dubya defended extraction industries, chemical polluters and the Bush crowd's ties to Saudi oil and reactionary governments.
But Hillary's range (and clients) are something new and more dangerous: riding Bill's immense, well-heeled domestic and international springboards (and world popularity), on full display at the $2 billion Clinton Foundation, she added her own sterling business facilitation at State. The Foundation's Global Initiative hunts up, pitches and aligns foreign government-NGO projects with for-profit corporate partners, boasting a mere 3200 "Commitments to Action."
As cheerleader for American interests, Secretary of State Clinton likewise facilitated masterful sweetheart alliances for the likes of GE, Microsoft, Exxon and Boeing. For some, business scores dramatize the paucity of her diplomatic wins. Appreciation in cash celebrated such marriages as foreign and domestic powerhouses banked Clinton, Inc.'s charity, smacking of sales commissions paid without legal penalties (tens of millions from Saudi Arabia, Australia and others since 1999). And the handsome multiple payoff: all dealmakers bask in the Foundation's admittedly good work.
Global Marriages that Bind the Rich
Just what any badly-conflicted, war-torn world culture needs: an organizing team of general partner who functions as marriage broker. After all, Senator Clinton didn't hide her "commitments to action," supporting Big Banks (in New York, where everything's too big to fail), Big Oil (Keystone, offshore drilling and fracking), and countless Pentagon suppliers profiting big time from her McCain-like war cries. Who better to expand, even rationalize today's plutocracy and defend global capitalism?
Forget campaigning to fix domestic fractures from class warfare, Wall Street corruption, righteous Yankee militarism, or taxing the richest just to squeeze some trickle downward. Forget "audacity of hope" when the "audacity of Clinton" pledges to bridge booming worldwide corporatism. What entity, other than Rockefeller family global reach, prepared us for Clinton, Inc.'s lust to seize the reigns of history? And why not, "it's the future," to echo Chinatown.
Consider changes to the Clinton Foundation masthead, to which Hillary added her name after leaving State. Curious, to many. What great gains, as restrictions against foreign donations are lifted, will offset the dreadful PR visuals? Aside from Bill's eye-raising, million dollar-a-year travel expenses, this "non-profit" Foundation chooses to merge a presidential frontrunner's chances with dark private enterprises in cahoots with regressive foreign governments prohibited from direct interference. Oh, my.
Would not a prudent veteran, surviving decades of vicious battlegrounds, shun blatant, readily avoidable conflict of interests? Would not savvy advisers press her instead to exile herself from pay-to-play scenarios? Only last week HC collect $300K for one speech (ironically giving her input on a middle-class that is clearly "dead broke"), some of which passed through the Foundation. Does this not itself test dubious thresholds, ethical and legal (considering an Algerian Foundation gift already violated agreements when HC took over State)?
Email Kerfuffle, News to Obama
And now the unforced private email blunder, violating the spirit, if not rules of transparency. Which Obama says he didn't know about until it hit the news? Doubtless, she discussed diplomatic and/or business arrangements presumably "profitable" to Hillary. And who isn't outraged Clinton, Inc. decide which emails go public? Does anyone believe Bill and Hillary obey the legendary Godfather movie division ("it's only business, not personal"). Personal business, like collecting $200 million for personal appearances since 2000, is what the Clintons do best, the lever that triumphed over their post WH "cash-flow" problem. Has the original Arkansas family mission altered: to be the richest, most connected, most influential power couple ever to stride the earth?
Thus, Hillary won't compete with Obama oratory, certainly not push real systemic reform. Vote for Hillary and you not only get the Clinton opera filled with sturm und drang (storm and stress) but double champions, masterful both in foreign climes or when knocking Congressional heads. Whatever sturm a nd drang from the vast, rightwing conspiracy, all sentient beings know by now who the Clintons are -- and what greatness destiny owes the world's most entitled, royal couple.
Elite's Highway to Heaven
We're talking two CEOs (one for all, all for one) who know everyone that matters, their (private) email and mobile phone at the ready. What ex-governor hick from Florida or Wisconsin won't by comparison appear a dismal hayseed up against remorseless international enemies? How much safer to have Clintons at the world helm, not the evolution- and science-denying dimwit, Scott Walker, absurdly conflating union-bashing with terrorist-bashing? What fear-mongered patriot won't cheer on tested, experienced leaders, so unlike the wobbly Obama who's still learning the ropes six years later?