The Great American Burger? Bush:Clinton:Bush:Clinton.
January 20th 2007 06:28
Someone to barrack for
It has been estimated that each candidate in the next American Presidential campaign, 2008, will spend US$500. It will be the first billion dollar campaign for the American President. Who will the candidates be? Some republicans have formally filed with the party, John Cox of Illinois (more about that state later) and Michael Smith of Oregon. Who are they? More famous persons have formed exploratory committees (more on those later). These include Rudy Giuliani and John McCain. Newt Gingrich has expressed serious interest. Buried within “serious interest” is an oxymoron somewhere, at least as far as the tadpole is concerned.
But what about this? Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. The potential for this extraordinary burger (“big whopper” is preferable) was first alluded to by the sagacious Gore Vidal. Some of you may not know him. He wrote Myra Breckinridge as well as many other rather famous and highly readable works of fiction. If you know him not still, I should point out that he was Jackie Kennedy’s half brother and the Gore is from the same political family that spawned Al Gore. Connect him now? The first Bush would be that crusty old warrior Bush senior. Bill Clinton we all know, George W. Bush is the current encumberant and Hilary Rodham Clinton is an aspirant.
This leads me to Democrat contenders. Two main ones stand out. Is-it-time-America-had-a-black-president Barak Obama and the much cheated upon Hilary.
Barak Obama is a rather silken Senator also from Illinois (see Cox above) who has also formed a committee to explore. Committees to explore in American politics basically means “Hello I am putting up the flag, does anyone want to send money my way?”
We do not know yet whether the fact that he is black is a plus or a minus. I suspect it is a minus since liberal voters tend toward apathy and conservative voters are more likely to go to the polls. While it is true that an African American became Chief of Staff of the Defense Forces, this is not an elected position. Roots may be another problem for Barak. It is also true that his father was a poor goat herder, a definite plus, this was in Africa not the USA. The thing about the roots of African Americans is that they should be deep roots and not really African if you can understand the paradox.
Barak has another thing going against him. He is a good plausible orator. Americans distrust great orators and unless you are prepared to accept stuff like “Ich bin ein Berliner” American presidents don’t tend to be great orators. You could say that Lincoln was an exception until you realize that it was only long after it was said that people realized just how good the Gettysburg address was.
Talking about paradoxes, there is the fund raising one. Barak is pushing the ethics barrow for elected officials but at the same time putting up his hand for big funding. He knows he will never be elected without money and a lot of it. We all know about money and its being the modern equivalent of Mephistopheles, aka Faust’s mate.
The big Grand Canyon between Clinton and Obama is the Iraq thing. Barak has decided squarely against the War in Iraq and is peddling the line of the French President about the USA should never have been there the first place. Clinton supported the war.
Clinton’s support of the war may go very much against her as the cesspit that has become Iraq becomes the reeking cesspit. The other problem with Clinton is the sheer incredulity of being someone who was supposed to be surprised by the infidelity of her husband. There is that joke that still does the rounds. “It is easily to count women who have not slept with Bill than those who have.” Remember that aria from Don Giovanni when Leporello unrolls a great list of his master’s conquests before Elvira. Three thousand? A mere drop in the ocean. Infidelity or not she has the support of her popular husband. That will count for a lot because without money election is impossible in that nation with the short attention span. Being a woman may not help with the feminist vote because being married to a womanizer and sticking by him when she is supposed to hate him will lose her that constituency. Not that this matters because those feminists who can be bothered to vote probably do not have significant numbers in a nation that imagines itself Christian with family values, oxymoron territory if ever there was.
So let us accept that Barak and Hilary do not have much hope at this point. I rather like the unlikely symmetry of Bush, Clinton, Bush Clinton, don’t you?
| 123 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
But here's another comment: J'accuse you of screwing up Lilla's blog! Check out her post on Mary Magdalene. I think the reason the alignment is funny (on Internet Explorer) is that you've used a word that extends over a line -- the word being the URL that you mention...
Comment by spain01
Juan Carlos
spain again
While your'e about it
Viva l'difference
Fire News Blog
Cities dying of thirst.
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
Comment by spain01
Juan Carlos
spain again
While your'e about it
Viva l'difference
Fire News Blog
Cities dying of thirst.