Only yesterday did I get around to reading an article which Glenn Reynolds linked on Saturday. Reading that piece, I learned that Eleanor Cliagree and I have some common ground; we both think Ms. Hillary wins ugly. That Newsweek columnist observes that in the remaining months of the campaign for the Democratic nomination there’s “time enough for Hillary to win ugly, if that’s what winning takes.”
It seems that for Ms. Hillary political victory and the power that comes with it are the be-all and end-all of her life’s purpose. Not commitment to principle or any higher ideals, but to herself.
As Clift observes:
If the Clintons get back into the White House, it will be retribution time, like the Corleone family consolidating power in “The Godfather,” where the watchword is, “It’s business, not personal.”
As many have observed, with her back up against the wall, Hillary has emerged as a tenacious campaigner. Frequent Clinton critic Bill Kristol finds she “has turned out to be an impressive candidate.”
Yet, watching her and (begrudgingly) impressed with her tenacity, I find my opposition to her grows. If she were fighting for some noble cause, I would see her as a true leader, a real American heroine. But, instead of waging a principled campaign for the highest office in the land, she has chosen the low road, switching her position on any number of issues and misrepresenting her own past, even misrepresenting her past positions on those very issues.
Even as Hillary has improved her chances at securing the Democratic nomination, her credibility continues to crumble.Â Many of her erstwhile allies now see her as an opportunist. Is this an individual American women would want as a role model?