Follow by Email

Saturday, March 23, 2013

Kathleen Parker, "For Hillary Clinton, the Time May Finally Be Right": Or Wrong

In a Washington Post opinion piece entitled "For Hillary Clinton, the time may finally be right" (, Kathleen Parker writes of Hillary's chances to be elected president in 2016:

"Not incidentally, the women’s vote is hers. Even Republican women would find it hard not to cast a ballot for Hillary. If not her, then who? And when? The Republican bench may be full, but, with the exception of Jeb Bush, a former Florida governor, it seems full of vice presidents rather than presidents. A Bush-Clinton contest might drive the country into dynastic delirium, but there would be a certain poetic symmetry: Finally the right Bush and the right Clinton.

Clearly, the “Hillary Clinton for president” proposition poses more questions than answers. But the calculus comes down to this: She has been working toward this moment essentially all her life, diligently clearing away the brush blocking her path. The zeitgeist is ready for a female president. Most important, she can win — and few think the country would be worse for it."

Come on, Kathleen, we're still years away from 2016, when, as you acknowledge, Hillary will turn 69. So much can change in the interim.

Sure, Hillary is as narcissistic and nasty as any other leading Democratic or Republican contender, and she will need to confront unresolved issues involving Benghazi ("What difference at this point does it make?”). On the other hand, she is also capable of making decisions, something that Barry has yet to learn.

Will she run? Much of the calculus will involve the state of the economy, which, although no longer comatose, is apt to remain bedridden. And then there is the question of how Iran ultimately plays out.

Also, the problem of Bill's philandering would have to be handled, no easy chore, unless he were to mysteriously meet the fate of Varys in "Game of Thrones."  Ouch.

1 comment:

  1. it's not like the dems will have anyone else for 2016, but I still think the Clintons are grooming NY Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand who trounced Obama in 2012 NY vote-getting (in contrast to Hillary's lower vote count in 2006 where about 250,000 more voters thought Spitzer was worth their vote because Hillary was a terrible Senator, in reality.)

    You think Bill's philandering is still an issue? Wait until Andrew Cuomo's baggage is dissected :)