So. The woman who once shed light on the "vast right wing conspiracy" has now become part of it. Lately, in addition to droppin' her g's, she's taken to comparing herself favorably to John McCain. There are, she admits, slight differences in their backgrounds, both of which prepared them well to be commander-in-chief: She spent eight years in the White House, he spent a similar amount of time in the Hanoi Hilton as a POW. I wonder if that's a subliminal revelation that the eight years she spent being raked over figurative coals were like Chinese water torture?
One has to wonder if she's positioning herself to be McCain's VP rather than Obama's. Ideologically, they have much in common: He's a moderate Republican, she's a DLC Democrat. They both admired Goldwater at one time. They're drinking buddies—apparently they bonded over Russian vodka. The McCain/Clinton ticket must hold some appeal: he's hinted at limiting himself to one term, thus setting her up nicely for another shot at the White House.
Here's a subliminal revelation of my own: I once admired Hillary Clinton, and even though I always supported her opponent in this primary, I felt compassion for her, wanted her to have a graceful, dignified exit from the race. She reminds me a lot of my mother, sharing the same coloring and bone structure. Every time I see her photo I picture my mom, before disease ravaged her physically.
I wanted to be Hillary's friend, but I didn't want her anywhere near the White House.
But now I'm wondering just how loyal a friend she'd be. How loyal to the basic values of the Democratic party, the party of FDR and Johnson would she be? What is her commitment to the social contract—the very same social net that rescued my mother when she could no longer work? Was her loyalty to NAFTA when her husband's administration was passing it only skin deep, like her vote for the bankruptcy bill—the one she claims later she was glad didn't pass?
Like Joe Lieberman, will rage at being dismissed send her right into the arms of the other side? We've already heard about another vast conspiracy out to get her—the media, for making her answer questions first; caucus goers, for being enthusiastic about her opponent; her opponent himself—how dare he make good speeches!
I've been certain, all along, that Hillary would remove herself gracefully from the race when she no longer deemed her campaign viable. But the last week has reminded me, I really don't know her at all. I've projected on to her the woman I wanted her to be, cast her in the roll of endlessly persecuted yet tireless defender of Democratic values.
There's a vast conspiracy all right, but this one is based in the White House-in-Waiting in Westchester. This time the lies are about NAFTA instead of Paula Jones, the meaning of "reject" rather than the meaning of "is." Like all conspiracies, this one's not pretty. It turns off those who would sympathize with its goals.
If Hillary Clinton really does believe John McCain would be a better president than Barack Obama—and she's given every indication she does—then she should formally endorse.
They could even use the same stage they used the other day, when George Bush gave him the presidential endorsement. Should be easy to find; it's just to the left of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
