by Emmett R Smith
MRS Senator Bill Clinton by all accounts may be within an ace of fatally losing traction in her persidential bid.
This throws into sharper relief the “democratic” Party’s potential problem, with the system of “superdelegates.” Apologists argue among many other things that this extra-pious supererogation prevents the winner-take-all problems that sometimes confront the GOP. But the problem for party managers is that there is thereby superimposed a potentially problematic additional and messy interpretive layer, in assessing the desires of party faithful — ordinary Democrats who do not have the means or time to devote to the more byzantine aspects of The Democracy.
For good or ill, “superdelegation” means managers have to assess and palliate successfully the thumbsucking competing claims, of handfuls of IOUs for old favors. This problem now is growing daily more intense for Democrats. Arguably, Mrs Senator Bill Clinton has the greater experience, of course….
But — just HOW GOOD has a lot of this last been?
Arguably, the one gimmick Democrats convincingly have in their overall favor especially with a public that does not understand economics entirely well and yet is entirely fed up with the state of today’s postcontemporary healthcare, is the possibility of offering some kind of that same healthcare to far more, if not “all,” Americans. And, indeed, Mrs Senator Bill Clinton knows the ropes on that one very well. Healthcare is the single biggest piece of domestic crumbling and stale cheese Democrats really now have on offer — and the desire has been there for a long time among many ordinary Americans. Indeed, Mr President Bill Clinton’s first term very nearly went on the ropes for good on that one, while his wife then was accumulating a good dose and inital rash of that same “experience” that Clintoneers vaunt now.
But for whatever reason, the senator from New York then also accumulated an undying legacy of deathly and insane, actually morally-crazed but nonetheless very real, hatred for her efforts then.
For national healthcare was wrecked not only by the greed of certain republican and un-American, then-already-globalizing, classes. Had the resistance then been only up to this handful of hogs, the thing should have walked right into law in a heartbeat. But, as well, the proposal was cursed by large numbers of other already subsidized “baby boom” professionalists, who cut their previously assigned cards and didn’t like the reduced prospects of their mid- and longterm aggrandisement-rates from out of the dwindling clout of cheddar.
Therefore, if she should be nominated and then sent to the White House, Mrs Senator Bill Clinton will be in a very different and lonely position to try to enact any promises she may make on the road to Hell. This is true for any President who comes out of the Senate and so will be Mr Senator Obama of course be rather lonely, in any similar case. The question then becomes:
How much lonelier shall one or the other Democrat be, if elected and sentenced and condemned to the Oval Office?
How much more or less hated?
How comparatively hopeless of fulfillment, any if not all the fair pledges?
The following, submitted to our attention by Mr Patrick Clancyof this place, and especially of interest to any Democrat or other American who actually wants what they may deem “progress” in national healthcare, is the most important piece I for one have yet read in this election year, about the prospects of the Democrat Party in 2008:
[Emmett R Smith all rights reserved 14 February 2008]