[Marxism] Hillary Clinton: The Perfect G.O.P. Nominee

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Sun Aug 14 15:18:55 MDT 2016

NY Times Op-Ed, August 14 2016
The Perfect G.O.P. Nominee
by Maureen Dowd

Hillary Clinton in June. Credit Monica Almeida/The New York Times

All these woebegone Republicans whining that they can’t rally behind 
their flawed candidate is crazy. The G.O.P. angst, the gnashing and 
wailing and searching for last-minute substitutes and exit strategies, 
is getting old.

They already have a 1-percenter who will be totally fine in the Oval 
Office, someone they can trust to help Wall Street, boost the U.S. 
Chamber of Commerce, cuddle with hedge funds, secure the trade deals 
beloved by corporate America, seek guidance from Henry Kissinger and 
hawk it up — unleashing hell on Syria and heaven knows where else.

The Republicans have their candidate: It’s Hillary.

They can’t go with Donald Trump. He’s too volatile and unhinged.

The erstwhile Goldwater Girl and Goldman Sachs busker can be counted on 
to do the normal political things, not the abnormal haywire things. 
Trump’s propounding could drag us into war, plunge us into a recession 
and shatter Washington into a thousand tiny bits.

Hillary will keep the establishment safe. Who is more of an 
establishment figure, after all? Her husband was president, and he 
repealed Glass-Steagall, signed the Defense of Marriage Act and got rid 
of those pesky welfare queens.

Pushing her Midwestern Methodist roots, taking advantage of 
primogeniture, Hillary often seems more Republican than the Gotham bling 
king, who used to be a Democrat and donor to Democratic candidates 
before he jumped the turnstile.

Hillary is a reliable creature of Wall Street. Her tax return showed the 
Clintons made $10.6 million last year, and like other superrich 
families, they incorporated with the Clinton Executive Services 
Corporation (which was billed for the infamous server). Trump has 
started holding up goofy charts at rallies showing Hillary has gotten 
$48,500,000 in contributions from hedge funders, compared to his $19,000.

Unlike Trump, she hasn’t been trashing leading Republicans. You know 
that her pals John McCain and Lindsey Graham are secretly rooting for 
her. There is a cascade of prominent Republicans endorsing Hillary, 
donating to Hillary, appearing in Hillary ads, talking up Hillary’s charms.

Robert Kagan, a former Reagan State Department aide, adviser to the 
McCain and Mitt Romney campaigns and Iraq war booster, headlined a 
Hillary fund-raiser this summer. Another neocon, James Kirchick, keened 
in The Daily Beast, “Hillary Clinton is the one person standing between 
America and the abyss.”

She has finally stirred up some emotion in women, even if it is just 
moderate suburban Republican women palpitating to leave their own 
nominee, who has the retro air of a guy who just left the dim recesses 
of a Playboy bunny club.

The Democratic nominee put out an ad featuring Trump-bashing Michael 
Hayden, an N.S.A. and C.I.A. chief under W. who was deemed “incongruent” 
by the Senate when he testified about torture methods. And she earned an 
endorsement from John Negroponte, a Reagan hand linked to 
American-trained death squads in Latin America.

Politico reports that the Clinton team sent out feelers to see if 
Kissinger, the Voldemort of Vietnam, and Condi Rice, the conjurer of 
Saddam’s apocalyptic mushroom cloud, would back Hillary.

Hillary has written that Kissinger is an “idealistic” friend whose 
counsel she valued as secretary of state, drawing a rebuke from Bernie 
Sanders during the primaries: “I’m proud to say Henry Kissinger is not 
my friend.”

The Hillary team seems giddy over its windfall of Republicans and 
neocons running from the Trump sharknado. But as David Weigel wrote in 
The Washington Post, the specter of Kissinger, the man who advised Nixon 
to prolong the Vietnam War to help with his re-election, fed a 
perception that “the Democratic nominee has returned to her old, hawkish 
ways and is again taking progressives for granted.”

And Isaac Chotiner wrote in Slate, “The prospect of Kissinger having 
influence in a Clinton White House is downright scary.”

Hillary is a safer bet in many ways for conservatives. Trump likes to 
say he is flexible. What if he returns to his liberal New York positions 
on gun control and abortion rights?

Trump is far too incendiary in his manner of speaking, throwing around 
dangerous and self-destructive taunts about “Second Amendment people” 
taking out Hillary, or President Obama and Hillary being the founders of 
ISIS. And he still blindly follows his ego, failing to understand the 
fundamentals of a campaign. “I don’t know that we need to get out the 
vote,” he told Fox News Thursday. “I think people that really wanna vote 
are gonna get out and they’re gonna vote for Trump.”

Hillary, on the other hand, understands her way around political 
language and Washington rituals. Of course you do favors for wealthy 
donors. And if you want to do something incredibly damaging to the 
country, like enabling George W. Bush to make the worst foreign policy 
blunder in U.S. history, don’t shout inflammatory and fabricated taunts 
from a microphone.

You must walk up to the microphone calmly, as Hillary did on the Senate 
floor the day of the Iraq war vote, and accuse Saddam of giving “aid, 
comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda,” repeating the 
Bush administration’s phony case for war.

If you want to carry the G.O.P. banner, your fabrications have to be 
more sneaky.

As Republican strategist Steve Schmidt noted on MSNBC, “the candidate in 
the race most like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney from a foreign policy 
perspective is in fact Hillary Clinton, not the Republican nominee.”

And that’s how Republicans prefer their crazy — not like Trump, but like 

More information about the Marxism mailing list