The Aura of Inevitability
[col. writ. 10/10/07]
(c) '07 Mumia Abu-Jamal
It's over a year until election day, but it is hard to avoid the common perception that the Democratic presidential nominee, and presumptive winner of the Nov. 2008 elections, will be New York Senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Part of this is due to the influence of the news media, which has made this race little more than a money race, where it might well be predicted (to paraphrase), 'to the victorious money-raiser goes the spoils.' There is another reason, one largely sculpted by political leaders in both parties: the front-loading of the primary states, where only the wealthy can play, for how else does one campaign, simultaneously, across the nation's vast geography?
When it comes to money, Clinton is truly impressive.
But, why is money determinative of who the winner shall be?
To create a meaningful campaign, vast sums of money must be raised, and spent, on mass media campaigns involving television and radio commercials.
You wanna know why the media is so gung-ho so early? For these communications companies, it's payday, and holiday, rolled into one. In a nutshell, politics is a big business.
And like most big business, only the wealthy can play this game.
This is also remarkable for a completely different reason.
Hillary R. Clinton is running on a record of failure. For, while she is admittedly a popular Senator, who has paid due attention to some of her constituents, she is part of a Congress that has been woeful in its failure to rein in a power-mad presidency on the big issues, of war and peace, of torture, secret prisons, wiretapping, and the like.
They have been frustrated because their apparent victory has been as hollow as a hula-hoop.
As this is written, members of congress are debating whether or not to make permanent the recent amendments to the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) law, which gave extended wiretap powers to the administration.