Posted on 02/16/2003 12:13:47 PM PST by muleboy
GORE - OUT, DASCHLE - OUT, Clark out also.
IN: Lieberman, Kerry, Edwards, Sharpton, Dean, Gephardt
MAYBE'S: Mosely-Braun, Kucinich, Graham, Dodd, Biden
3rd party maybes: McKinney, Nader
The only potential DEM candidate to out-poll Hillary during 2002, Al Gore, is out of the race, so he says. The only other potential DEM candidate to get more media "face-time" in opposition to President Bush, during 2002, Tom Daschle, is also out. The only potential candidate whose military credentials would outflank Hillary from the right, Gen. Wesley Clark, is also out. I don't believe Kerry's "service" counts for much.
Thus the DEM field consists of two handfulls of small-fries, wannabes, and cranks. The perfect formula for a lack of consensus, a divisive and intense primary season following a pathetic and inconclusive pre-primary, fundraising year. Setting the stage for a groundswell of support to "draft" Hillary, should Bush seem vulnerable, or Gore, if victory seems less probable. Only Kerry can fund himself and he is now slightly hampered by health questions. Both Lieberman and especially Kerry, could survive a bloody primary season, get the Nomination, and slug through to defeat, allowing the DEMS to concentrate their money on House and Senate races, should circumstances warrant.
But before the money primary is concluded, another factor that could wreck the scales will be decided. In September of this year, the UN may elect a new Secretary-General. If an unpopular Kofi Annan resigns, the way will be cleared for none other than BILL CLINTON.
As a life-long observer and chronicler of Bill Clinton's career, I find such a scenario easy to imagine. Bill has always lacked the patience that Hillary has, and he does not function well away from the spotlight. In view of the current machinations taking place between the Bush administration and the UN, it would seem that Bush is in a lose-lose-lose situation.
If Bush goes to war in Iraq, without UN sanction, dozens of nations will turn to the UN to try to check future uses of American power.
If Bush forges or finesses a new UN resolution authorizing force in Iraq, and the war goes well, the UN will be strengthened implicitly, and Kofi Annan could leave office on a high-note, and provide Bill with the opportunity to return to the spotlight, with more power than any previous UN Secretary-General.
If Bush gains a new UN resolution and the war goes badly, both he and Kofi will suffer disastrously, to Bill Clinton's potential benefit.
Indeed, when one examines many of the activities of Bill Clinton during his Presidency, (excluding cigars, sinks, and blue dresses), it makes a great deal of sense to conclude that Bill was planning for the possibility of becoming the head of the UN. Money to North Korea and Ireland, technology transfers to China for campaign contributions, multiple, seemingly pointless, trips to Africa and Southeast Asia, and a pre-occupation with resolving the West Bank dilemma, including interfering directly in Israeli elections, all look quite different when viewed through the prism of Bill's post-presidential ambitions. Bill's history with Fulbright, Carroll Quigley, Oxford, and Mena, also point beyond the U.S.
The fallback position for Bill and Hillary hinges upon 2006. Kofi Annan's term in office will be up, as will Hillary's in the US Senate. If, for some conglomeration of reasons, Hillary does not run in 2004, I expect her to run for the Governorship of New York in 2006, while Bill angles to become the UN's Secretary-General. In order to setup Hillary's run for the Presidency in 2008.
All I can say to that is, "Never in my life have I been so glad and thankful, to NOT live in the state of NEW YORK".
Kerry - a Massachussetts socialist? Next!
Edwards - another slimey, slick Southern lawyer? Yeah, right!
Sharpton - a race pimp with a pompadour. No further comment necessary.
Gephardt - a socialist with all the personality of a bowl of rice.
Just the idea of President Hillary, while Bill heads the UN is enough to make me shake uncontrollably, reach for the Guinness, and put an old REM record on the turnstile:
"IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT"
As I consider the single greatest threat to the current levels of liberty and economic security of the citizens of the United States to be the election and inauguration of Hillary Rodham Clinton as President of the United States, I am therefore initiating this thread for the purpose of debate and monitoring of the unfolding circumstances which will ultimately determine whether this impending threat is realized or avoided.
I chose the analogy of the DOOMSDAY CLOCK as a useful tool for measuring the advances and retreats of this impending threat by means of inspiring and soliciting public debate on the perceived relevance of current events as they relate to HRC's obvious ambitions.
In my opinion, the events of this December 2002, have moved the "clock" from 20 minutes until 12 to 15 minutes to 12. These events are in order of importance, 1. The announcement of Al Gore not to seek the Presidency on Dec. 15 2. The reporting of a Dec. 21 CNN/Time Poll describing support for an HRC candidacy at 30% versus the announced and likely candidacies of Kerry and Lieberman at 13% each 3. The successful re-invigoration efforts of the Democratic Party's vitally important core constituency, black voters, as evidenced by the Lousiana Senate race victory and the resignation of Trent Lott.
The current setting of a quarter to 12 represents, in my opinion, the idea that less than a dozen new criteria would have to happen for the doomsday result to be realized. I would arbitrarily assert that future revelations concerning the economy, the war, and the current administration's legislative programs would move the clock a minute or two, whereas such things as an announcement of a candidacy or consideration of a potential candidacy, perhaps a separation from her husband, and the nomination itself in the summer of 2004 would move the clock as much as 5 minutes, in and of themselves.
I hope this thread will provide a useful, educational, and entertaining tool for those who believe vigilance is a necessary responsibility and obligation of those who seek the maintain and expand individual liberty.
All comments are welcome, let the debate, pontificating, and monitoring begin!
Put me down for $100...
It makes sense when you consider who created the UN.
I wonder if Bill would become a "citizen of the world" in order to skirt (pardon the pun) such a rule?
While I am no fan of W's, and second terms are usually dreadful, almost anything would be preferable to a President Hillary.
If W's war goes well, the economy recovers, he is re-elected in a landslide, followed by an ordinary second term, I could easily see the American people clamoring to have the new wealth spent domestically instead of internationally.
Led by Her Highness of Health Care, of course.
Louis Pasteur
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.