A Lot of Time & Character Separates Truman & Clinton

There isn't much I can add to the reporting in this article by Kenneth P. Vogel in Politico.com.

The entire article is at the following link:



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9531.html

Below are a few quotes from the article.




"The price tag for Clinton’s federal retirement allowance from 2001 through the end of this year will run $8 million, compared to $5.5 million for George H. W. Bush’s and $4 million for Jimmy Carter’s during the same period. "


"The Clintons have made a $100-million fortune since leaving the White House,..."


"Congress passed the Former Presidents Act in 1958, after news spread of the financial struggles of former President Harry Truman."

In his memoirs, Harry Truman wrote the following:

“I could never lend myself to any transaction, however respectable, that would commercialize on the prestige and dignity of the office of the presidency.”

I won't insult your intelligence by offering any comments, except.

=(

Richardson Endorses Obama: A Member of the Family Disowns Hillary

For Obama, it's merely icing on his already sweet victory cake. Richardson's endorsement will pull about as much weight with voters in the General as would A-Rod's or Jennifer Lopez's.

But for HRC, it's a consequential refutation by one of her own family members, a man who Bill Clinton essentially "made." If she cannot even secure the support of pols who owe their own success largely to the efforts of Clinton, Inc., how in the world is she supposed to gain support from those who owe her husband nothing?

Richardson's endorsement can best described as "rats deserting a sinking ship," smart rats, to be sure.

It helps Barack only by hurting Hillary.

[Note: One thing about HRC: this woman can sure take a pounding and remain upright. She's actually showing more character as an also-ran than she did as the front runner.]

Who Has Home-Field Advantage in a Mud-Wrestling Bout?

The singular phenomenon that has become known as Barack Obama became such because a large segment of the (Democrat) voting public interpreted his words, his demeanor, his aura, even his physical presence as being something other than the typical politician's.

Ironically, he was seen as a White Knight astride a sturdy steed gazing down upon his mud-covered opponents. He was clean; they were not. Although obviously in the fray, he somehow seemed simultaneously above it. He alone was the non-scumbag of the bunch---his passionate desire was to win, not to destroy. Somehow, people could not envision him in some hotel room being counselled by such creatures as Rove or Carville or Penn or Rollins. Barack was clean, no steroids, no HGH. It was the other guys who were "juiced," not him.

Maybe Bill Clinton was correct after all when he described the Obama-phenomenon as "a fairytale."

If he suddenly decides to play on HRC's turf, he's giving up the home-field advantage. She and her team are the undisputed heavyweight champs of mud-wrestling. And maybe, in the final analysis, politics is the ultimate form of mud-wrestling. But perhaps a potential president needs a little dirt under his fingernails to handle the job he or she is seeking. And, if that is the reality, Barack must enter the ring.

As an idealistic, overly romantic fool, the White Knight scenario captures my heart. And yet, the pragmatic, realist side of me is not totally convinced that rolling in the dirt with dogs is the way Barack is going to win.

Hillary's Game: Reflecting the Starlight of Others

HRC's "lifetime of experience" consists in being married to a CinC during his eight years in office. She never served in the military, of course, and her combat experience probably consists of a pillow fight or two between her Wellesley sorority sisters and perhaps a bunch of fraternity boys. The sheer audacity of equating herself to McCain in the sphere of Commander of the military is exceeded only by her insinuations that Obama is somehow not in the McCain-Clinton league as far as national security/military matters are concerned.

Hillary is a professional coattail rider. She's riding Bill's, obviously; otherwise she would be as serious a candidate as the junior Senator from Oklahoma (whoever that may be.) But at least Bill is her husband. Now she is trying to attach herself to the coattails of the man she ostensibly is attempting to make her adversary in November. She likes glorying in the reflected light of stars. Stars radiate their own light; and, like them or not, Bill and McCain generate their own light---they are stars. Hillary lives in the reflection of the light of true stars, being incapable of generating light herself.

Unfortunately for her, she currently finds herself up against an opponent--Barrack-who has star power: again, like him or not, he radiates his own light and need not worry about catching the rays from another. So what does she do? She proposes that Barack be her running mate. Why? So she can capture the light he radiates and claim it is her own.

Hillary demeans not only herself, but the whole premise of the independent female making a serious run for the presidency when she reverts to the basking in some other individuals glory, especially when she chooses two stars that are male.

Obama's response to this pathetic line of attack against him should drip with sarcasm, but not so much that voters again feeling sorry for poor Hillary.

With the singular exception of Dwight Eisenhower, who served as Supreme Allied Commander in WWII (a fairly impressive rank, don't you think?), no candidate in recent times has ever been patently "qualified" to assume the CinC role, including McCain, Obama and HRC. But to make her "lifetime of experience" the lynchpin of her campaign is one of the great strategic blunders perpetrated by any campaign in recent memory---the public is just not that dumb.