The most worrisome thing about Hillary Clinton isn’t so much that she’s a nanny-state liberal or even that she’s hopelessly corrupt—it is her tendency to view the world in terms of good versus evil. As David Brooks writes in today’s NYT, it is this Manachaean world view that informs her rigid position on health insurance mandates.
Clinton has turned the debate between universal coverage and universal access into a sort of philosophical holy grail, with a party of righteousness and a party of error. She’s imposed Manichaean categories on a technical issue, just as she did a decade and half ago.
The assertions of various Clinton lickspittles notwithstanding, there is room for honest, informed disagreement on mandates. But Her Majesty isn’t having any. She is approaching the debate just as she did 15 years ago, when the issue was employer mandates and her primary philosophical opponent was Democratic congressman Jim Cooper:
On June 15, 1993, Cooper met with Clinton to discuss their differences … He warned that her plan would never get through Congress. Clinton’s response, Cooper now says, was: ‘We’ll crush you. You’ll wish you never mentioned this to me.’
Now Hillary’s primary philosophical opponent is another Democrat named Barack Obama. And, despite the fact that he agrees with her on almost everything else, his heresy on mandates has put him on the wrong side of the Manichaean divide. He must, therefore, be villified by Hillary and her slimy minions.
Regardless of your political leanings, this kind of absolutism should make you nervous about giving this woman access to the powers of the Presidency.
Comments 14
This Manachaean world view is part of her severe Mixed Borderline-Paranoid Personality Disorder. Hillary is a profoundly character flawed person, unfit for President by any measure.
Posted 05 Feb 2008 at 8:44 pm ¶Yawn - another armchair psychiatrist.
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 7:24 am ¶Marc, you are correct. Smartdoc, please remove the term “borderline.”
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 11:04 am ¶wanting to be president of the united states should be an automatic disqualification, anyone who wants that job must be crazy……..except me!!! hahahahahahahaha
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 12:33 pm ¶You’ve got a point, drmatt. Can you imagine putting up with all the prying and stupid questions? Then, if you win, you get verbally abused by all and sundry for your whole term.
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 1:24 pm ¶and the pay sucks!!!! Truly, I cant imagine, and on top of all that you mention, the stress (assuming you care at all) of being held responsible for every problem of the whole country and many problems around the world. No thanks, I’ll continue to be a nameless complainer and criticizer.
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶Actually, I don’t find it funny - it’s misogynistic smearing based on hatred of the idea that a woman could be so powerful. Substitute ‘black’ or ‘Jew’ in the smears and you get the idea.
Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 5:13 pm ¶Marc, I have a feeling that you don’t find anything funny. There was not a single comment having to do with her gender so get over yourself.
Posted 07 Feb 2008 at 10:23 am ¶‘There was not a single comment having to do with her gender so get over yourself.’
Don’t be ridiculous - surely you must realise the invective (corrupt, mad etc) is precisely because of her gender. Does the name Salem mean anything to you?
Posted 08 Feb 2008 at 4:53 pm ¶You’re getting into tinfoil hat territory, Marc. I’ve also used similar adjectives to describe Michael Moore and John Edwards. Unless they have had operations recently, they are male.
Posted 08 Feb 2008 at 9:26 pm ¶Hillary Clinton has been subjected to sustained misogyny from many quarters - if it was the odd the comment I’d agree with you but you and others here join in with demonising her in modern terms as a witch. Stick to the issues.
Posted 09 Feb 2008 at 2:59 am ¶Marc, my posts on Hillary are about her statism, her well-documented history of corruption, and her paranoic personality. All of these are very relevant when she (or anyone else) seeks the most powerful (and dangerous) office on the planet.
You really do need to move beyond these shopworn memes about misogyny and witch hunts. They’re not convincing and they don’t address the actual points I make in the actual posts.
Posted 09 Feb 2008 at 7:52 am ¶Marc, put up some proof. Oh that’s right, there isn’t any. You have become a characture of the reactionary left. I bet you bought into the vast right wing conspiracy as well.
Posted 11 Feb 2008 at 10:48 am ¶Oh great, another latter-day feminist painting Hillary Clinton as an innocent, helpless victim of gender-based oppression. People like Hillary Clinton aren’t victims, Marc. They’re aggressive attack dogs who will anything to get on top.
Posted 08 Mar 2008 at 6:26 pm ¶Also, I thought feminists were about empowering women. By implying that Hillary is weak and helpless, you are contributing to the same stereotypes which you claim that you so utterly despise.
Post a Comment