Thursday, May 28, 2015

The Hillary Enigma


By Alan Caruba

Does it strike anyone as strange that the only candidate for the Democratic Party’s nomination to be the next President of the United States is the wife of a former President? There is no historic precedent for this, no way to measure this against how Americans have selected Presidents in the past.

Like most Americans, I first took notice of her when Bill began his campaign to become President. I recall being struck by the fact that in 1969 as a student at Wellesley College, her 92-page senior thesis was devoted to the community organizer, Saul Alinsky’s book. The title of the thesis was “There is Only the Fight…”: An Analysis of the Alinski Model.” She would request Wellesley to deny access to it.  

Alinksy was a Communist. His twelve rules for radicals, unlike the Ten Commandments, are devoid of a moral message. Instead, the message is “this is how you can win.”  Hillary would do well to review Rule 7, “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”  She was already old news when she announced her candidacy and it is becoming older with every passing day as she fails to take questions from the media, participating in totally staged events to look like “one of the people.”

She and Bill are not one of the people. They, like the Bushes, are political royalty. They have both been around a very long time.

Hillary, however, despite the millions of words that have been written about and by her remains an enigma. Other than being farther to the Left than Bill, she is a woman whose “achievements” in life have largely been the result of having married Bill. She would spend eight years in the White House as the First Lady and, pursuing her college dreams of political power, they would move to New York State where she ran and won a Senatorial election.

There isn’t a single Senate bill that she introduced or that is credited to her. She is said to have worked hard and gotten along well with her colleagues, but her Senate years are a blur in her public life. Then she made a bid to be the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate in 2008 and along came Barack Hussein Obama with whom the voters fell in love. When he was elected, he asked her to become his Secretary of State.

With the exception of the Benghazi tragedy on September 11, 2012, a clear failure of judgment and duty, and about which she lied, her years as Secretary of State reflect her years in the Senate; nothing of any significance resulted, no major treaties, no major anything, except for one more scandal.

So the question remains; who is Hillary Rodham Clinton? What are her fundamental principles beyond the acquisition of political power? And money. Lots of it while uttering nonsense such as she and Bill being “dead broke” when they left office?

What are we to make of her deletions of thousands of emails on her private server—something she was not supposed to use as Secretary of State—and her assertion that those we may never see were of no importance? They’re important if, as is widely believed, foreign governments hacked her private email server and thus had access to information about policies affecting themselves and others. She may not have broken a law, but she surely did not obey Obama White House policy regarding the emails.

Alinski’s Rule 1 is “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have. Power is derived from two main sources—money and people.”

We are told that Hillary has a huge amount of money with which to wage a campaign to become the first woman President. In light of the revelations about the Clinton Foundations, virtual slush funds, and the millions earned by her and Bill to give speeches, there is little doubt of that.

You cannot, however, buy trust and the polls indicate that is seeping away.

Her die-hard supporters probably know as little about her as the rest of us, but it is their trust she is depending on right now. Should she actually receive the Democratic Party’s nomination, the distrust of independent voters, disaffected Democrats, and of course Republicans, will play a crucial role in who is elected in 2016. It is not likely to be Hillary Clinton.

It is not likely because, as we have already seen, she seems to have reached a point where her political abilities have grown tired and out-of-date. These are not the 1990s. A whole generation has been born since Bill was President.

Like her, the Democratic Party seems tired as well. Can you believe there is not another Democrat, a Governor or Senator who could emerge to represent the Party? How devoid of any real leadership has the Democratic Party become if the only candidate they can offer is a former First Lady? That has been her primary claim to fame despite the two offices she has held since the 1990s.

I suggest that Hillary ceases to be an enigma if you just think of the Wellesley student who thought the best topic for her senior thesis was the book by a dedicated Communist, Saul Alinsky.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

8 comments:

TexasFred said...

Well, once again you have stepped up to the plate and hit one right out of the park... Nothing left to say other than KUDOS my friend....

weaserdapi said...

Those voters that voted for Obama will vote for Hillary, there are very few that care anything other than she is a democrat and will (or so they believe) push through their agenda. The vast majority of democrat voters do not care that she is a rich 1%er, which they claim to despise. They don't care that we lost Ambassador Stevens on her watch. They wont care about her age, the numerous women of Bill's improprieties that she personally destroyed. THEY DON'T CARE, they will vote for her anyway. Almost a full 50% of the voting public are so devoted to vote for a democrat that they have already elected Obama, who is and was at the time so unqualified and under qualified for the position it defies logic. Hillary is almost a shoe in, and the democrat machine are recruiting more and more democrat voters by any means possible to make up for the few that they lose when they come to their senses. Just look at the push to get ex-felons to vote, the amnesty programs and so on. The fact that Hillary is a viable candidate for the democrat party is so unconscionable to anyone that is smarter than a rock is the ultimate proof that the electorate has been corrupted beyond repair.
The short version is WE AREN'T VOTING OUR WAY OUT OF THIS!
Good Luck and G_d Speed. E.

Harry Dale Huffman said...

I would add one final sentence: "And she sought to deny access to it." To me, that is definitive of her lack of character (on a par with Obama's).

Alan Caruba said...

I pray that you are wrong and fear that you may be right.

daolman said...

Alinksy said that power is what you have and what you appear to have?? I always thought that political power from the barrel of a gun.

Alan Caruba said...

@ Doalman. Political power, elective, is different from authoritarian power which does indeed come from the barrel of a gun.

Wayne Petersen said...

Alan, I have tried to comment here before and I wasn't successful, so here it goes. Hildebeast stood at her lecturn on the stage with the the other candidates in '08 and said she was a progressive, as opposed to a democrat. Progressives are Marxists. Saul was a Marxist. I don't have the faith in our voting system that I had in my younger days and believe that our votes are manipulated through the voting machines that are supposed to be programmable (with no paper trail). That said, I can see the hildebeast being elected by the same percentage points as b.o.

Nora Norris said...

Bill Ayers, when asked what his violent Weathermen group would do when they achieved their goal of a communist takeover of America,said:

“50 million Americans will need reeducating in concentration camps located in southwestern American states, and about 25 million will have to be eliminated.”

Decades ago Bill clinton's involvement in the import of heroin concealed in the body cavities of US military casualties. During her term as Secretary of State $6 billion in earthquake aid to Haiti was unaccounted for, and her brother was given a 5-year permit to mine gold in Haiti, a country known to exclude foreign mining interests. The attack on the US embassy in Benghazi exposed the ongoing CIA arms smuggling operation; the smuggling of Libyan weapons to Syrian rebels.

It's absurd to confuse Hillary and Bill Clinton's affiliation with US government with their true identity as representatives of an international criminal cartel.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/10218288/CIA-running-arms-smuggling-team-in-Benghazi-when-consulate-was-attacked.html