Clinixon

John Ellis makes some good points. Hillary is really, really unlikable. Who is she like? No, not Doubleyou. Doubleyou-haters became deranged only after the election. The election itself didn't help matters. You remember -- that whole hanging-florida thing? With those various Supreme Courts getting themselves involved? No, Hillary is hated old baggage -- did that come out right? Hated for her old baggage, the way Nixon was hated. Yep. It's Hillary Milhous Clinton.

Her chief strategy is that she's electable. Come again? It's an open field. There's no incumbent. They're all electable. I don't know much about him, yet, but I certainly don't dislike Obama. In a match between him and her, I'd take him every time. Go Obama! All he seems to have is appeal, but maybe he'd grow into the job. The only president who never did was the first clinton. His growing was of another sort. Zing. Git it? I'm talking about his penis. See?

Which brings me to Hillary's vagina, presuming she has one. It seems to be a factor in this election, the way her husband's penis never was, in his erections. Elections. (Git it?) She wants votes for being female, and wants no criticism at the same time, because she's female. Just another way the Woman is keeping the black man down. (Obama. Git it?) Although ... how is Obama black? Isn't he white? His mother doesn't count? It's all so confusing to me. But we were talkin' 'bout 'gina. No wonder I'm confused. Let's start over.

Hillary is loathed by about half the electorate. There are a fair number of Democrats who say they'll never vote for her. Remember how she promised never to be no Tammy Wynette, standing by her man? It's sort of an unlikable thing to say. But that's who she is. Hillary, don't run from it. Embrace it. And overcome it by showing yourself to be competent. We don't mind tough. We hate slimy. It's just nuts to nominate her. But the same might have been said for nominating Nixon. They are deeply flawed characters. Both are riddled with motherload veins of dishonesty. Perhaps because of this, Nixon didn't use an inevitability argument. He didn't strive to be likable. Instead he showed himself to be competent. That's the winning strategy, to overcome the huge negative of dislikability.

Unfortunately for her, she isn't. Isn't competent. How did that myth get started? Her ahem executive experience in the White House, overseeing the Health Care Fiasco, demonstrates her managerial style. Not a winner. Probably not even tough. Mean is not the same as tough. The fact that she whines like a sissy-girl the first time her competitors criticize her demonstrates her incompetence and cowardice. Can you imagine? She can't handle the heat of the campaign, without complaining, publicly, about feeling attacked. She does not answer them, she complains about them. We do not need to elect a tattletale-in-chief. To whom would she tattle? Her Magic Mirror on the Wall?

Ellis demonstrates how uninevitable she is. She has a little loss of momentum, and it shifts to Obama. After that she has no strategy. He's not uninevitable, and she is unlikeable. All she has is money and name-recognition. No exceptional experience, no special talent, no broad base of appeal. What is the delusion going on here?

Ellis says she is smart like Nixon, and this is correct. Calculating. Nixon was determined, as is Hillary. Nixon seems to have been more of a patriot, but perhaps that's just how his self-serving nature showed itself. At least he resigned when the time came. clintons seem to hold on with a death grip. As for being tested, I don't see it. Nixon was tested throughout his career. Rejected politically. Existentially. All Hillary has had to deal with is family problems. That's what we all have to deal with.

Where they are most alike is in the paranoia. It's a very real thing in Hillary. Her aides in the White House, both male and female, called themselves the Stepford Wives. That "vast rightwing conspiracy" comment of hers was no fluke. She has an enemies list, and she could teach Nixon a few lessons about vindictiveness. Maybe she's studied him. In fact she certainly has -- she worked on his impeachment. Do we really need to go through this again? The worst of both impeachments? A paranoid character and that clinton kabuki theater of mediocrity?

Hillary can be elected. Only if the Republicans really really screw up. As they are wont to do. It doesn't need to happen, but it can. Nothing like it has ever happened before. A combination of Cleveland with his two non-contiguous terms, and the Adams and Harrison and Roosevelt and Bush family successions, and the long reign of FDR, but that isn't it. A woman, but that isn't it either. A non-elected president, in bill clinton again, but we had that, sort of, in Ford. As we had a co-president slash spouse, in Mrs. Wilson. What's different is that we've never had someone elected simply because they were a relative. It seems a step down.

And then there's that bothersome character issue again. Hers. She complains about being attacked. That's sort of a weak character, wouldn't you say? I suppose I really mean judgment. She thinks this is an attack? What would she do with a real attack? -- you know, the sort where thousands of people die.

This is not a time for a weak president. I like strong women. I know it's rude, but this one's just a bitch.


J