"For 15 years, I have stood up against the right-wing machine and I’ve come out stronger. So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I’m your girl.” So said Hillary Clinton today at an AFL-CIO rally.
Apparently, in the befuddled mind of Hillary Clinton, standing against the "right wing machine" included voting in favor of invading Iraq. Thanks to Senator Barack Obama for pointing that out to those who seemed to be suffering from amnesia.
Clinton's reference to a "right wing machine" evokes memories of an earlier time when she talked about a "vast right wing conspiracy". Both terms suggest that there is unanimity within the Republican party, and that we Republicans are cold, soulless people who care nothing for the needs of others.
Funny, I would have thought that such a characterization would be more appropriate for the party which is most responsible for the needless deaths of tens of millions of unborn children over the past 34 years. That's vastly more people than the number of people who have died in Iraq. Either Democrats can't count, or they prefer to ignore the implications inherent in the fact that many of their own leaders have acknowledged that human life begins at conception. That includes Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson and John Kerry. You can check it out for yourself if you don't believe me.
I suppose that it's appropriate that Clinton would talk in terms related to machinery when speaking with members of the AFL-CIO, particularly at a gathering in Chicago. The AFL-CIO has long been known for its political "machine" (which is why Clinton so covets the group's endorsement), and the same could be said for the Democratic party in Chicago.
Clinton's use of the term "machine" is only slightly less paranoid than her earlier use of the term "conspiracy". If Republicans have such an efficient and powerful machine, then why is it that we haven't managed to overturn Roe v. Wade, despite more than three decades of trying to do so?
If Hillary Clinton fails to win the nomination or the election, she will undoubtedly blame sexism. But that will be a misplaced attribution. I'd be happy to vote for a female candidate if I could be persuaded that the individual candidate in question was competent, and that that candidate possessed the level of insight and integrity which is needed by a president of the United States. There may well be a woman out there somewhere who fits that description, but Hillary Clinton is not that woman. I think she's an idiot. Nevertheless, I hope that she beats Barack Obama in the primaries, because Obama will probably be harder to beat in the general election.