29 March 2008

I get support from the strangest places

CNN.com's Political Ticker is my first stop for the latest in irresponsible spin on the election debacle of the day.  They're about as objective as, well, journalists, but I find it great fun anyway.

Now I stand by my opinion that Bill Clinton was not the great hero that people like to think he is, but I don't get a lot of support for it (well, not from Democrats anyway).  Despite my support for that "other guy" (you know, the BLACK one), I think that Senator Hillary Clinton would actually fare better than her husband in the White House, primarily because I don't think she'd make the same mistakes that he made.  Unlike the Bush Presidency, most presidents are hated for their cock-ups rather than for their successes.  Sure, Bill had some success, but I think his mistakes (see "It's your prioritized bullet-list, stupid!" below) outweigh them.  I've got a feeling that Hillary's agenda is going to be a fair bit more conservative (as in "careful" not "Republican"), especially in the areas of foreign policy and sexual indiscretion.

So that's my opinion, and I'm sticking by it.  But I never thought I'd get support from two Democrats in particular: Bill and Chelsea Clinton.


Considering Bill's inability to ever again officially occupy any part of the White House other than the Lincoln Bedroom, it's a lovely campaign piece: "You liked Bill?  Well Hill's even Better!"  But I tend to agree in the literal sense.  Mrs. Clinton has the kind of dignity and experience that might keep her out her husband's worse decisions.

That's not to say that she won't have to deal with the same problems Obama or McCain would have to deal with, such problems as will probably destroy their respective careers before any of them truly begin, but given the climate we're in, I'd definitely vote Hillary before welcoming the illustrious and unconstitutional return of her husband.

No comments: