The Diary of a Former Leftist
All politicians are opportunists. Some more than others. Hillary, for instance, more closely resembles a crocodile. She lurks at the waters edge, waiting for her moment to strike at any prey foolish enough to take a drink. Her greatest political resource is Bill Clinton, a politician of genuine gifts, but one who also suffers from a severe lack of moral character. Hillary appears to have none of Bill's political acumen, but, like Bill is abundantly lacking in the moral department. In that sense, she offers the hope for a 3rd Bill Clinton term, with Hillary solely as a figurehead. That is Hillary's greatest asset. There's just one problem, it isn't 1992.
Liberals tend to forget that Bill Clinton managed to become president because he ran as a "New kind of Democrat." Meaning, that he ran as a fiscal conservative. In 24 years, from 1968 to 1992, democrats had only won the presidency for a single 4-year term. With the recent memory of the Jimmy Carter debacle fresh in voter's minds, Bill Clinton knew that he had to be perceived as something other than George McGovern or Jimmy Carter.
In 1984, the democrats had been foolish enough to run Walter Mondale, Carter's former vice president against Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately, for them, Mondale was a man so devoid of personality that he barely met Descartes maxim of "I think therefore I am." Whether Mondale actually existed or not is still open to debate. It didn't really matter, though. Americans remembered all too clearly Carter's double digit inflation and nearly 20% mortgage rates which produced the most disastrous economy since the Great Depression. Various high profile military debacles at the hands of foreign powers didn't help either.
Four years later, Michael Dukakis became the democratic nominee, advocating similar policies. Mondale and Dukakis should be stark reminders of just how disconnected political party insiders can be from the people in the streets. Both men were rejected like a bad organ transplant by Americans across the board. Meaning, If Bill Clinton had any hope of winning the presidency, he had to distance himself from his parties growing socialist tendencies and run as a stealth republican.
Once Clinton won the presidency and, after a very shaky start, he was substantially aided in his goal to govern as an actual conservative by presiding over the republican takeover of the congress for the first time in a half-century. Thank's, in no small part, to his early missteps as president. With the newly elected Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich acting as the iron that sharpened Bill Clinton's tenure as a conservative democrat, they actually managed to get a few major things accomplished, all of which republicans had been trying to do for decades. This included welfare reform, a couple of major trade bills and, a burgeoning economy. The economic recovery was enabled substantially by Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan's expansive monetary policy. Clinton did, however, grasp the importance of reasonable economic policy, much to the chagrin of the left wing of the democratic party, who openly despised him for not being another George McGovern.
So yes, Bill Clinton was president during a period economic expansion. And yes, he was a democrat, but in name only, at least as far as economic issues go.
What will Hillary do if she wins? This isn't 1992. There are some similarities between president Obama and Jimmy Carter, of course, all of them negative, regardless of how you choose to look at them. But here's the real difference, there was a 12-year gap between Carter and Clinton, with 8 of those years being Regan years.
What does this mean? Would a good God give us Hillary as president now, when we're in such dire straits? As a divine punishment, possibly, but hopefully not. We may be lost as a nation in many ways, but not that lost. Here's hoping.
Mark Magula
Liberals tend to forget that Bill Clinton managed to become president because he ran as a "New kind of Democrat." Meaning, that he ran as a fiscal conservative. In 24 years, from 1968 to 1992, democrats had only won the presidency for a single 4-year term. With the recent memory of the Jimmy Carter debacle fresh in voter's minds, Bill Clinton knew that he had to be perceived as something other than George McGovern or Jimmy Carter.
In 1984, the democrats had been foolish enough to run Walter Mondale, Carter's former vice president against Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately, for them, Mondale was a man so devoid of personality that he barely met Descartes maxim of "I think therefore I am." Whether Mondale actually existed or not is still open to debate. It didn't really matter, though. Americans remembered all too clearly Carter's double digit inflation and nearly 20% mortgage rates which produced the most disastrous economy since the Great Depression. Various high profile military debacles at the hands of foreign powers didn't help either.
Four years later, Michael Dukakis became the democratic nominee, advocating similar policies. Mondale and Dukakis should be stark reminders of just how disconnected political party insiders can be from the people in the streets. Both men were rejected like a bad organ transplant by Americans across the board. Meaning, If Bill Clinton had any hope of winning the presidency, he had to distance himself from his parties growing socialist tendencies and run as a stealth republican.
Once Clinton won the presidency and, after a very shaky start, he was substantially aided in his goal to govern as an actual conservative by presiding over the republican takeover of the congress for the first time in a half-century. Thank's, in no small part, to his early missteps as president. With the newly elected Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich acting as the iron that sharpened Bill Clinton's tenure as a conservative democrat, they actually managed to get a few major things accomplished, all of which republicans had been trying to do for decades. This included welfare reform, a couple of major trade bills and, a burgeoning economy. The economic recovery was enabled substantially by Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan's expansive monetary policy. Clinton did, however, grasp the importance of reasonable economic policy, much to the chagrin of the left wing of the democratic party, who openly despised him for not being another George McGovern.
So yes, Bill Clinton was president during a period economic expansion. And yes, he was a democrat, but in name only, at least as far as economic issues go.
What will Hillary do if she wins? This isn't 1992. There are some similarities between president Obama and Jimmy Carter, of course, all of them negative, regardless of how you choose to look at them. But here's the real difference, there was a 12-year gap between Carter and Clinton, with 8 of those years being Regan years.
What does this mean? Would a good God give us Hillary as president now, when we're in such dire straits? As a divine punishment, possibly, but hopefully not. We may be lost as a nation in many ways, but not that lost. Here's hoping.
Mark Magula