- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
What I find maddening about Senator Clinton is that she has so much potential as a candidate. No one questions her intelligence and savvy. And, yes, I understand she faces additional challenges in winning over voters as the first woman (and former first lady) with a realistic chance to win the presidency. However, even in this day and age, when it's clear to all but the most obstinate conservatives that the Bush Administration has severely screwed up on a whole host of issues, foreign and domestic, she still is fearful of upsetting people by saying the wrong thing or taking a certain stance. Hence her decisions to pander to the right on violent video games and flag-burning. Hence her fallacious attempt to claim that she was "misled" by President Bush into voting for the AUMF, when it's obvious that in so voting she made a conscious decision to DO THE POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT BUT MORALLY REPUGNANT THING and authorize war against Iraq. Anyone with half a brain knew Bush and co. were salivating to go to war at any cost. The man in the street knew it, I knew it, but a U.S. Senator of her smarts didn't know it? Bullshit.
Has anyone thought about the fact that if Clinton gains the White House, the U.S. will have been ruled since 1988 by either a Bush or a Clinton? Do we really want this sort of dynastic politics taking root in our country. I will never support Sen. Clinton's run for the presidency. All politicians pander to a degree. But, Sen. Clinton seems unable to take a stance without first testing how the winds are blowing on a given day. It's the sheer level of political calculation that goes into her every decision, her inability to say "fuck it, I'm taking this stance because it's right, and I don't care what people think" that turns me off.
