- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I know some people don't trust Hillary because she is always so prepared, pundits call her stiff and practiced. I always feel like we are seeing two different people. I like it that she is prepared. I don't have a problem that she is always the smartest person in the room...
I am in agreement on all of this. Furthermore, in contrast with the "smart guys" in the Bush administration – Wolfowitz comes to mind, in particular – she is not so blinded by ideology and so impressed with how smart she is that she is unable to learn from mistakes.
In my opinion, Hillary's biggest drawback is that she seems to approach a political fight leading with a compromise instead of settling for a compromise in the end. This is a problem I have with the most Democrats these days, and against slash-and-burn Republicans it is a losing strategy. It is why they come off like wimps.
I also see far too little recognition among Democrats of the very serious damage that the Bush administration has wrought on the foundations of American democracy - some of which was already underway long before Bush. Bush is a symptom of what can happen when the imperial presidency is in place. I'd like to see a Democrat (or a Republican, for that matter) who would convince me that one of their major goals is to reduce the power of the presidency: No signing statements. Unqualified denunciation of the 'unitary executive' horseshit that makes bastards like John Yoo cream their jeans. A promise to never inappropriately invoke 'executive privilege'. No wars without Congressional declaration of same. Maybe with these kinds of issues on the table, a Democrat in the White House could put together a comprimise coalition with people like McCain to bring in real campaign finance reform - with public financing of presidential and congressional races.
