Hillary Falls Flat on Her Face

Supported by a mysteriously high level of support, while dodging and weaving around softball interchanges for years, Hillary Clinton’s teflon finally wore off last night during the MSNBC debate when she met her match. Finally, what many of us have been waiting to see: Her insubstantial character, her grossly inflated "35-year record of accomplishment." And her legislative initiatives and non-binding resolutions were sufficiently deconstructed until none of the best image makers in the world can put Humptess Dumptess back together again. It was, undeniably, a miserable performance, which couldn’t be patched up with that giddy, well rehearsed grin, polished statements, amorphous comebacks, and Drill Instructor comportment.

If she looked presidential, which dolts like Chris Matthews have been claiming from the beginning, then it could only mean the president of a preowned car lot specializing in Yugos. At long last the great divide between Appearance and Reality, or as Plato called it, Being, was narrowed, first and foremost by her vote to condemn the Iranian guard as terrorists. Supporters - if there are any left - may tell you she was assaulted by her desperate opponents in an effort to chip away at her astounding, undeserved lead. But the truth is, on this night - the next fateful appearance after her remarkably asinine vote against Iran - the room could’ve been filled with deaf mutes and her inadequacies would’ve been apparent.

That she remained the virtually uncontested candidate, despite a huge negative rating at the national level, in retrospect was more miraculous than the 15-laterals-in-one-play that Trinity used to win last weekend. At least give her credit for being a tremendous magician. Chris Angel’s trickery has nothing on Hillary’s Wizard-of-Oz show - an ongoing play in which she has made promises and pledges without providing specifics or target dates for programs that will "change" America for the better. And the poor Redskins could’ve used her playbook for going right, then going left, mixing it up, and making her way down the field without a bruise when they faced the Patriots last Sunday when they were defeated 52-0.

The difference in Hilary’s case, thankfully, will be that she won’t score. It won’t be long now before she’s just a bad memory. And that’s too bad for the women’s movement. Yes, it’s true. Women have gotten unfairly shut out and that will, no doubt, be rectified one day soon. But the country’s in no position to endure Hillary for the sake of righting an old wrong. For example, consider the following:

On August 19, ’07, speaking at the Veterans of Foreign Wars 108th annual convention in Kansas City she talked about the surge, ’’It’s working. We’re just years too late in changing our tactics...We can’t ever let that happen again. We can’t be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war.’’

And that new war? Just ask her good friend Joe Lieberman, or for that matter one of the Neocon strategists she sympathizes with. It’s WWIII, which accelerates after the U.S. bombs Iran. That’s, of course, if you’re paying attention. She’s been counting on the fact that most Americans only respond to the buzz words she uses so frequently, such as "negotiate." Yeah, she’s not telling you about the fine print, which says that she wants to negotiate after the bombs have fallen. It’d go something like this, "Hey suckas, now that you’re in shambles, kick your leaders out of office and turn democratic." Sound familiar?

Or consider her recent appearance on This Week on whether she would withdraw all the troops before the end of her first term. To George Stephanopoulos: "You know, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges, because I don’t know what I’m going to inherit, George. I don’t know and neither do any of us know what will be the situation in the region. How much more aggressive will Iran have become?" Clinton said. "What will be happening in the Middle East? How much more of an influence will the chaos in Iraq have in terms of what’s going on in the greater region? Will we have pushed al-Qaeda in Iraq out of their strongholds with our new partnership with some of the tribal sheiks or will they have regrouped and retrenched?

"I don’t know, and I think it’s not appropriate to be speculating. I can tell you my general principles and my goal. I want to end the war in Iraq. I want to do so carefully, responsibly, with the withdrawal of our troops, also, with the withdrawal of a lot of our civilian employees, the contractors who are there, and the Iraqis who have sided with us."

You got that? She wants to end the war, but she’s not sure when, or how, and exactly what she would then do about the "War on Terror." Well, in an open society, in a true democracy, isn’t this obfuscation a form of terror? Isn’t it akin to the same imperious attitude W has shown for the Constitution?

We don’t have to know. When you’re ready, when you feel good about the circumstances, then maybe, if you’re in the mood and you’re sure you can’t fail - like Kissinger call it Peace with Honor - then perhaps you’ll end this fiasco. Yeah. We just fell off the turnip truck so we’ll take whatever you’ve got, ’cause we’re all just idiots. Well, my fellow Americans, the idiots got a good look behind the curtain of Hillary’s imperious aims last night and they’d be fools to back it.

Her pretzel logic was thus: Pass a bill calling the Iranian guards terrorists and then you’re in a better position to negotiate. OK, I’m one of the millions of idiots out there - I’ll admit it - so let me dumb this down so I’ll be able to understand it. Let’s use the playground for an example. You’ve been picking on me for as long as I can remember and I want you to stop without whipping you butt so, let’s see, I’ll call your mother a whore and we’ll go from there.

That’s the foreign policy strategy that’s going to save America from the folly of W. What’s she’s not telling you is that her focus-group gurus gave her a bum steer - a fatal miscalculation: Vote yes on the bill in order to look tough. After all, they told her, no doubt, you’re a lady in pastel colors and you’ve got to work against that, so above all, in this tough-ass world we’ve got going now, thanks to the Neocon nightmare, always look tough. Take no shit.

Oops. Somehow, her brilliant team of managers presumed that the people - who are passionately against the war - weren’t watching, that her opponents would remain asleep and conciliatory. But autumn brings change. And her actions must bear requisite consequences. Yo Hillary, she’ll be hearing more often now, we don’t need your brand of "leadership."

Oddly, the nail in the coffin last night had nothing to do with the "War on Terror." She was asked about the New York proposal to provide illegal immigrants drivers’ licenses. "I support it," she said. Then Chris Dodd gave an impassioned defense for not extending the privilege of driving to illegal immigrants, and wouldn’t you know it? Just as Obama and Edwards have been saying about her penchant for twisting in the wind, she flipflopped. Right there on the record for millions to see. Russert asked her, "Do you support the measure?" And she said she didn’t exactly support it. Huh? Well, it was a whole minute later, and as we know a lot can happen in a minute - a New York minute nonetheless - that’ll inspire a shift in views.

It was the Exhibit A her detractors have been pointing to ad nauseum. It was the smoking gun, proving that she lacks conviction, and despite the bellicose tone, doesn’t exhibit the kind of authority it takes to run a major city much less a world-class country.

If you didn’t see it; please make a point in doing so. It’s tantamount to Howard Dean’s whoop in the night that returned him to political oblivion - an arena Hillary now belongs in.

http://novus.liber.us/2007/10/30/hillary-falls-flat-on-her-face/