"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide."
- John Adams, second president of the United States (1797–1801), letter, April 15, 1814
Maureen Dowd is not keen on the Clintons, and long before the final days of the inept, scandal-ridden, Obama administration play out, Dowd is already preparing to wage war against Hillary.
In her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Money, Money, Money, Money, MONEY!" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/opinion/sunday/dowd-money-money-money-money-money.html), Dowd begins:
"Why is it that America’s roil family always seems better in abstract than in concrete? The closer it gets to running the world once more, the more you are reminded of all the things that bugged you the last time around.
The Clintons’ neediness, their sense of what they are owed in material terms for their public service, their assumption that they’re entitled to everyone’s money."
"America’s roil family"? Oddly enough, this play on words is not far afield from Frank Bruni's quip in his Times op-ed of today's date, "The Past’s Future Republican" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/08/frank-bruni-pasts-future-republican-was.html), in which he declares:
"Clinton versus Bush would be political royalty versus political royalty."
So, this is what results after a 240-year glorious experiment in democracy: Americans seek the return of "royalty," or at least something akin to a televised War of the Roses. Dowd, however, is far more "forthcoming" than Bruni when taking the measure of the House of Clinton:
"If Americans are worried about money in politics, there is no larger concern than the Clintons, who are cosseted in a world where rich people endlessly scratch the backs of rich people.
. . . .
We are supposed to believe that every dollar given to a Clinton is a dollar that improves the world. But is it? Clintonworld is a galaxy where personal enrichment and political advancement blend seamlessly, and where a cast of jarringly familiar characters pad their pockets every which way to Sunday.
. . . .
The Clintons want to do big worthy things, but they also want to squeeze money from rich people wherever they live on planet Earth, insatiably gobbling up cash for politics and charity and themselves from the same incestuous swirl."
Yup, I suppose I would call that less than friendly on the part of Dowd.
But thirst for power aside, is this latter day Lady Macbeth competent? Can Hillary claim even a single achievement during her time as secretary of state? On the other hand, after eight years of Obama, perhaps it no longer matters to the American electorate.
If she gets the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination and succeeds Obama, America will have gotten - richly and royally - what it deserves en route to the nightmare ending foreseen by John Adams.
No comments:
Post a Comment