The Democratic Party has got to know that Hillary Clinton's track record in politics has been less than stellar. From the early days of the Bill Clinton White House, she has been dogged with missteps and scandal. We all remember how Bill practically made her the co-president and handed her the job of overhauling the health-care system – and we remember what a debacle that was.
She was hounded by scandals and whispers of dirty deals she and Bill were involved in. Shady alliances and files gone missing and then mysteriously found were fodder for journalists until Monica Lewinsky came along.
When the dust settled and the Clinton's finally released their grasp on the keys to the White House, Hillary decided that it was her turn and she would cast off the negativity of the past and reinvent herself. She ran for Senate, even though she wasn't even from the state she planned to represent. The media started to give her a bit of a hard time, but then they must have gotten the memo to back off and started supporting her.
Just like "Teflon Bill," nothing seemed to trip Hillary up. She was touted as the woman who was wronged yet stood strong and now it was her turn to shine. It was inevitable that no matter what, Hillary Clinton would serve in the U.S. Senate. And she did.
Her time there was unspectacular at best. There was not a single piece of legislation passed with her name on it. She may have brought a number of bills up, but none was co-sponsored, and they all died. The ideas that she had were lackluster and didn't ignite passion with her fellow senators.
TRENDING: 'Art of the Deal': How Trump turns COVID issue into 'win-win'
Of course, she was always in the news, always being followed and talked about – not because of her legislative abilities, but because she was a "Clinton," a celebrity politician.
With 2008 looming dead ahead, Hillary knew that the brass ring was within her reach. Even with nothing to talk about except how great things were when she and Bill ran the country and how great the economy was during those years, she knew it wouldn't take much for her to claim the nomination for president, that is until Barack Obama came along and smooth-talked his way into the voters' hearts. It was all razzle dazzle, and he did it well. Obama began to knock the heir apparent from her perch, and she didn't like it one bit.
With Obama's nomination and ultimate win Hillary had to be patient a little longer. She halfheartedly smiled her way through when given the job of secretary of state, but ended up botching that position with the fiasco in Benghazi. Her incompetence, poor decisions and blatant lies about what happened that night put a huge spotlight on her that she could not hide from. Then, when she testified and said, "What difference at this point does it make?" it looked like the road to the White house was not going to be easy.
All of this doesn't seem to matter, though. She is obviously going in run in 2016 despite the old bob and weave of her "not making a decision yet." She made her decision, and she made it decades ago. The question is, do the Democrats really want her to run? Is she really the slam-dunk winner they think she is?
If they rely on the fact that she would be the first woman president, then yes, I guess they would back her. After all, it would be sexist to vote against a woman, right? No matter that she isn't qualified and has no real track record, as long as she is a "first"; that's all that matters.
Qualifications don't matter much anymore, and that is why we are in the mess we find ourselves in today. It's all about the razzle dazzle, the celebrity name, being a "first" – not about being strong, visionary and having a great track record behind you.
The Democrats may win with Hillary – who knows? But after the six-plus years of Barack Obama, maybe the American people will wake up and vote against another Clinton. Maybe this time they will vote for substance, not style.
Media wishing to interview Morgan Brittany, please contact [email protected].
|