A Hillary grudge match with Bam?

James Lewis
Jimmy Carter was not just defeated by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election. Carter, the president who could easily be confused with his own floppy sweater, was first knocked down by Smilin' Ted Kennedy, who was entitled to be president because he was a Kennedy. (Don't ask, this is how Democrats think.)  Kennedy ran against Carter because the other Democrats were less prone to suicide than they are today. They still lost big.

Obama started the fight three years ago, in the minds of feminists, by tarring Hillary and Bill as "racists." Today we are getting media leaks from the Clintons: "I don't know what the future holds," said Bill the other day, going wink, wink, nudge, nudge, and looking sincere. Liberal snitch Paul Bedard said it more clearly in the US News blog: Hillary Campaign Conspicuously Emerges.

This could become a grudge match. You can call smear good and honorable Americans with the racist brush all you want, but just don't call another Demagogue a racist. It's not polite. They have ways of making you pay. And feminists are the nastiest of them all. Harvard's left feminists ate President Larry Summers for breakfast one day. And

Hillary's supporters have been boiling with rage since she lost to the Chicago Machine.

I never thought to hear myself say it, but I wonder if Hillary might be saner than Barry on critical foreign policy questions. Domestically there's not a dime's worth of difference between them, but foreign policy is about national survival. We forget that at our peril.

The world is getting more dangerous, with nuclear proliferation now officially out of control. The Muslim world is in a state of near-universal rebellion. People are getting shot on the streets in Syria, Libya, Yemen and Egypt. In the tragically cycling history of the Muslim world, chaos is always followed by tyranny, and tyrants do two things to stay in power: They arm up to the max, and then look for a foreign enemy to blame. Israel is a useful goat, but with an Iranian bomb in the next six months no dictator is going to feel safe without a bomb of his own.

The logical outcome of Obama's "Arab Spring" agitation is Arab nuclear proliferation. Once the Mullahs have their Bomb they think they are invulnerable. Other than hatred for the infidels, their personal power means everything. The Saudis won't like an Iranian nuke at all, and they have said in public that they're in a mood to go shopping. They certainly can't rely on the US to protect them anymore.

The next president will therefore see a more dangerous world than ever before, and Hillary, as SecState, has been living with that reality every day. Every time she talks to Bill they discuss what a disaster Obama has been. Clinton even wrote a book about it, called "Back to Work."  You can't get more obvious than that, can you?

Hillary supposedly had a screaming match with Obama at the White House when O was helping to stir up the fiasco called the "Arab Spring," it is rumored.  Obama still thinks that worse is better in international affairs, just like worse is better in domestic affairs. He's a community disorganizer by profession and belief, after all. His job is to push over political establishments in order to pick up the pieces for himself. That's what Alinsky agitators do.

Hillary is an older woman than Obama -- well, you know what I mean -- and may not be as rigid ideologically. Besides, with Bill as First Hubby she would get a lot of practical advice, something Obama and his inner cult can't tolerate. Bill Clinton actually negotiated with Republicans in Congress. O can only sneer at them. If O negotiated with the GOP, his left-of-left followers would go into screaming hysterics.

Hillary and Bill are now dropping hints like autumn leaves. This may be Hillary's last chance, and she knows it. If Obama wins again, Hillary will be a tiny footnote in history. Democrats in endangered districts know their political lives are on the line. Big-money lobbyists in DC can swing a lot of money for Hillary.

Finally, the Clintons' third term would get free media coverage if she ran against Obama. It would be the first "historic" political fight between two "historic" (but dreadful) Demagogues.

As for conservatives, we can pretend to be the New York Times and cheer for the biggest loser.

It would be fun.

And it couldn't happen to two nicer people.

Jimmy Carter was not just defeated by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election. Carter, the president who could easily be confused with his own floppy sweater, was first knocked down by Smilin' Ted Kennedy, who was entitled to be president because he was a Kennedy. (Don't ask, this is how Democrats think.)  Kennedy ran against Carter because the other Democrats were less prone to suicide than they are today. They still lost big.

Obama started the fight three years ago, in the minds of feminists, by tarring Hillary and Bill as "racists." Today we are getting media leaks from the Clintons: "I don't know what the future holds," said Bill the other day, going wink, wink, nudge, nudge, and looking sincere. Liberal snitch Paul Bedard said it more clearly in the US News blog: Hillary Campaign Conspicuously Emerges.

This could become a grudge match. You can call smear good and honorable Americans with the racist brush all you want, but just don't call another Demagogue a racist. It's not polite. They have ways of making you pay. And feminists are the nastiest of them all. Harvard's left feminists ate President Larry Summers for breakfast one day. And

Hillary's supporters have been boiling with rage since she lost to the Chicago Machine.

I never thought to hear myself say it, but I wonder if Hillary might be saner than Barry on critical foreign policy questions. Domestically there's not a dime's worth of difference between them, but foreign policy is about national survival. We forget that at our peril.

The world is getting more dangerous, with nuclear proliferation now officially out of control. The Muslim world is in a state of near-universal rebellion. People are getting shot on the streets in Syria, Libya, Yemen and Egypt. In the tragically cycling history of the Muslim world, chaos is always followed by tyranny, and tyrants do two things to stay in power: They arm up to the max, and then look for a foreign enemy to blame. Israel is a useful goat, but with an Iranian bomb in the next six months no dictator is going to feel safe without a bomb of his own.

The logical outcome of Obama's "Arab Spring" agitation is Arab nuclear proliferation. Once the Mullahs have their Bomb they think they are invulnerable. Other than hatred for the infidels, their personal power means everything. The Saudis won't like an Iranian nuke at all, and they have said in public that they're in a mood to go shopping. They certainly can't rely on the US to protect them anymore.

The next president will therefore see a more dangerous world than ever before, and Hillary, as SecState, has been living with that reality every day. Every time she talks to Bill they discuss what a disaster Obama has been. Clinton even wrote a book about it, called "Back to Work."  You can't get more obvious than that, can you?

Hillary supposedly had a screaming match with Obama at the White House when O was helping to stir up the fiasco called the "Arab Spring," it is rumored.  Obama still thinks that worse is better in international affairs, just like worse is better in domestic affairs. He's a community disorganizer by profession and belief, after all. His job is to push over political establishments in order to pick up the pieces for himself. That's what Alinsky agitators do.

Hillary is an older woman than Obama -- well, you know what I mean -- and may not be as rigid ideologically. Besides, with Bill as First Hubby she would get a lot of practical advice, something Obama and his inner cult can't tolerate. Bill Clinton actually negotiated with Republicans in Congress. O can only sneer at them. If O negotiated with the GOP, his left-of-left followers would go into screaming hysterics.

Hillary and Bill are now dropping hints like autumn leaves. This may be Hillary's last chance, and she knows it. If Obama wins again, Hillary will be a tiny footnote in history. Democrats in endangered districts know their political lives are on the line. Big-money lobbyists in DC can swing a lot of money for Hillary.

Finally, the Clintons' third term would get free media coverage if she ran against Obama. It would be the first "historic" political fight between two "historic" (but dreadful) Demagogues.

As for conservatives, we can pretend to be the New York Times and cheer for the biggest loser.

It would be fun.

And it couldn't happen to two nicer people.