From guest columnist The Hippie Conservative:
It’s now official, ex-president Bill Clinton will be the keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention. Clinton will speak in the prime-time slot in Charlotte, N.C. on Sept. 5, the night before current president Barack Obama formally accepts the party nomination. I have to wonder, as I’m sure many other people do, if this was a good idea given his recent past of bad mouthing President Obama’s tax policies and talking up his opponent’s record. I’m sure Bill will give a great performance as he always has, but I have to wonder if the headline the next day may be some little “gaffe” that President Clinton “accidentally” threw out there.
For those of you that are unfamiliar with what’s been going on between the Clintons and President Obama, or for that matter, the friction between the DNC and the DLC, I’ll spell it out in a way that may give you something to think about while you’re watching this dog and pony show.
It’s easy to reach the conclusion that all is not completely happy in Democrat Utopiaville. From the start of the 2008 election, Hillary and Barack were not exactly great friends. After all, he “stole” the election from her and if you don’t think Hillary remembers that, then you don’t know Hillary. I know the Democrat talking points have been that it’s all in the past, that Hillary was pacified with a nice Secretary of State position designed to give her foreign policy credentials and that all’s been forgiven, but allow me to make the case that Bill’s “gaffes” are not accidental.
First, let’s start by explaining the difference between the DNC and the DLC. The DNC, or the Democratic National Committee, was established at the 1848 Democratic National Convention. It’s what most of you think of and know as the Democrat Party. The DNC, and it’s counterpart the RNC, or Republican National Committee, make up the two parties that all of us recognize as our two-party system here in the U.S. The DLC, or Democratic Leadership Council is far less known or talked about. It is, however, very crucial in understanding what is going on between Barack and the Clintons. To simplify, the DLC was formed by friends of the Clintons to counter the rise of the left-wing progressives within the DNC and give the more moderate wing of the DNC a place to call their own rather than see a divisive split. While the DLC technically doesn’t exist anymore, the divisions and loyalties do. To further simplify, Barack Obama is DNC, the Clintons DLC. The election of Barack Obama was a coup by the DNC and greatly diminished the power of the DLC and, by proxy, the Clintons.
Now, as for Bill’s motive, as I see it, in undermining the campaign of Barack Obama.
Bill Clinton is, to say the very least, a masterful political strategist. He’s an expert at reading the political tea leaves and plotting the future. He also lives for seeing the day when he is back in the White House, albeit as Hillary’s second-in-command. What I believe Bill sees at this juncture is an economic future that is not very bright for a variety of reasons. Those include: the depressed economic state of Europe, an unstable Middle East, the overwhelming growing debt in the U.S. and the unwavering Keynesian economic philosophy of President Obama. I believe that Bill has concluded that if President Obama wins a second term, he will suffer through a lackluster economy burdened by growing debt and an increasingly frustrated populous.
The end result of this will be low approval ratings for President Obama and near zero chance of getting Hillary elected in 2016. History also is stacked against Hillary in this scenario as the Democrats have not held the Presidency for three terms in a row since FDR. If the economy does not improve in Obama’s second term, a Republican will get elected in 2016 and Hillary’s chances of ever being President will be greatly reduced. From Bill’s point of view, it would be far better to see President Obama lose, then have Romney do the unpopular cuts (or he’ll suffer the same fate as Obama’s economy) and then run Hillary as the savior from the draconian President Mitt.
Before any of you get too depressed about Barack’s chances for re-election, let me put a positive spin on if he should lose. At this point in time, Barack’s term is quite defendable. He came into a bad situation; he had some achievements in his presidency like the health care overhaul and Osama Bin Laden’s death. In historical perspective, he would look rather good. If he gets another term and fails, as Jennifer Granholm did in Michigan in her second term with the same economic policies, his legacy will be far harder to protect. If he completes only one term without the assassination many of you predicted, racial healing and a future black president would be far more likely. The situation for our economy is not very bright and there is a slight chance of it collapsing, I think you should ask yourself: do you really want this hung around the neck of President Obama? While Romney may not be any of your choice for president, I think it may do you some good to consider…could Bill Clinton be right?
The Hippie Conservative blogs at http://thehippieconservative.blogspot.com/