Posted on 03/01/2008 7:15:57 AM PST by Richard Poe
| by Richard Lawrence Poe Friday, February 29, 2008 |
Archives Permanent Link |
I ADDRESS this column to that new breed of conservative, the Hillarycon. These are conservatives who support Hillary Clinton. Below I describe the three types of Hillarycon and explain why each is wrong.
TYPE 1: The Innocent Hillarycon
The first type is the most well-meaning, but possibly the most deluded. Innocent Hillarycons view Hillary as a weaker candidate than Obama, and thus seek to help Hillary win the nomination.
They are wrong. Hillary's weakness is an illusion. She is playing rope-a-dope with Obama. By hanging on the ropes, and taking Obama's punches, Hillary saves her strength for the knockout punch.
Rest assured, the knockout will come. No matter how many primaries Obama wins, Hillary will beat him at the convention. Backroom intrigue is her specialty.
Hillary will bully, bribe and blackmail the superdelegates to vote for her. She will claim disqualified delegates from Michigan and Florida. She will steal state delegates through litigation. At the appointed time, Hillary's media operatives will ambush Obama with allegations of corruption, immorality and extremism.
Hillary has powerful patrons in all the right places. She will win the nomination.
The real purpose of Hillary's rope-a-dope is to lull Republicans into complacency. In this, she has largely succeeded.
Conservative talk radio jocks have lost interest in Hillary. On February 11, Sean Hannity suspended his "Stop Hillary Express" campaign, arguing that Obama poses a greater threat. Rush Limbaugh told listeners on February 26, "the longer Hillary can stay in this the better for us." He urged Republicans to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary in the primaries, "to keep that party at war with itself."
Hillary's rope-a-dope has paralyzed conservative book publishers, none of whom are assigning Hillary exposés. They fear she will drop from the race before their books hit the shelves.
"When I get anti-Hillary proposals, I tell them, ‘Just wait and see if she becomes president,’ ’’ says Marji Ross, president of Regnery Publishing. Regnery's 2004 release Unfit for Command torpedoed John Kerry's campaign.
No Unfit for Command will dog Hillary this election season. It is too late to assign such a research-intensive book. Hillary has outmaneuvered the dirt-diggers.
TYPE 2: The Crafty Hillarycon
The second type of Hillarycon supports her for Machiavellian reasons. A Hillary presidency would teach Americans a lesson, they say. Her extremist policies would shock the nation, driving voters into the conservative camp.
Nonsense. This is a formula for suicide. As president, Hillary would liquidate conservatives, unleashing the fury of America's counterterror apparatus against us.
Most vulnerable are volunteer groups like the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, which patrols the Mexican border to stop illegal crossings. Minutemen were outraged when President Bush called them "vigilantes". But Bush never hampered their operations. President Hillary would handle them differently. She would declare the Minutemen "domestic terrorists" and send them to Gitmo for waterboarding.
If this sounds farfetched, consider the counterterror policies of the last Clinton regime. Barely a month after Bill Clinton took office in January 1993, Muslim jihadists detonated a bomb beneath the World Trade Center, killing six and injuring thousands. The Clintons responded by declaring war on "domestic terrorists".
Only two days after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing -- on February 28, 1993 -- the Clintons laid siege to the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas. New York Governor Mario Cuomo told NBC on March 1 that our biggest security threat was, “Americans killing one another with guns". Attorney General Janet Reno declared on March 13 that her number one priority would be protecting abortion clinics from terror attacks. Then came Project Megiddo, an FBI program targeting rightwing Christians.
TYPE 3: The Spiteful Hillarycon
The third type of Hillarycon supports Hillary out of spite. These are ideological purists whose hatred for President Bush has metastasized into hatred for all things Republican. Since they must vote Democrat or not vote at all, they choose Hillary, claiming she is more "conservative" than the rest.
Spiteful Hillarycons are the worst of the lot, because they are phonies. They know very well that Hillary has not a "conservative" bone in her body. But then, neither have the Spiteful Hillarycons.
What they share with Hillary is anger and vengefulness. They would gladly cast their votes for Mao Tse-Tung, if they thought it would vex President Bush. Their motives are psychological, not political.
This then is the Hillarycon agenda. It is neither a Republican agenda, nor a conservative agenda, nor a winning agenda. It is Hillary's agenda. Surely we can do better than this.
|
Richard Lawrence Poe is a contributing editor to Newsmax, an award-winning journalist and a New York Times bestselling author. His latest book is The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Siezed Control of the Democratic Party, co-written with David Horowitz. |
Harpo11 wants ON.
Obviously, these two think it is so much fun for their future business interests and money making enhancements to support Clinton Inc.
I find them to be nothing but shills for the "Retread Establishment". Clinton, Inc. should be very happy with these two "Hillarycons".
Too bad they didn't put this much concerted effort into supporting a better conservative presidential candidate than the one we are stuck with because of their so high and mighty retort, "we don't support a candidate during the primary races". BS Hannity and Ditto Limbaugh.
Sincere thanks for doing what needs to be done. There should be a voter medal of honor awarded to citizens crossing over to send Hillary home to Bill, to take care of her own family instead of messing with ours.
It makes my family sick that Rush and Sean are playing this game without examining the consequences of their flippant ill-thought call to support her.
Ron Paul, what a wasted vote.
“Ron Paul, what a wasted vote.”
But, a true, honest, courageous and brave vote!
If you want to send a “message” to the GOP “THIS” is how you do it.
I’m not trying to be hurtful.
To say that going to IRAQ was bad is liberal thinking.
To blame the USA for the Towers coming down is scary.
You people need help.
It’s like a cult.
Don't you think make it's time get out before you hurt youselves or someone else.
Supporting either McCain or Hillary amounts to the same thing. If you support Hillary you are not a conservative, if you support Obama you are not a conservative and if you support McCain you are not conservative either. If you support Hillary over McCain you are definately stupid and definately not a conservative. I do not support any of these candidates, but especially I don't support the Dem candidates. McCain will not get my vote but I am not going to root for Hillary or Obama. I will write in my vote or vote third party, I will vote for any conservative senator or congressman who is running for office, if such still exist, but I will never vote for a liberal, regardless of the initial after their name, and that includes McCain.
I am not sure I completely understand your reply to me, but if you mean that supporting hillary over McCain is the way to go, please turn your brain in for a new one, you need a transplant. Conservatives don't vote for dems in the general, if they do, they are not conservatives, nor do they vote for Rinos wearing republican clothing.
Well said, and VERY accurate! Thanks for the ping, and I hope, hope, hope that those with BDS (including conservatives) take heed.
“I’m sorry but people who support Ron Paul makes me question are that lacking in common sense.”
Well, I’m sorry but people who DO NOT support Ron Paul make ME question THEIR common sense.
“I’m not trying to be hurtful.”
Nor, am I. I am trying to be practical here.
“To say that going to IRAQ was bad is liberal thinking.”
Excuse me, but I do believe you have your facts wrong. Do you believe our troops should be deployed to third world hell holes to rebuild these sorry a$$ excuses for countries; while putting their life at risk; and for an undeterminable amount of time?
“To blame the USA for the Towers coming down is scary.”
If you have actually read or heard the facts, you know this is not correct. Ron Paul is not blaming the USA, but simply stating that he would approach things differently, with hopefully a better outcome, certainly financially. Context is your friend.
“You people need help.”
America needs help.
“It’s like a cult.”
No where near the complacency I witness here everyday to “go along” with whatever the GOP dishes out.
“Don’t you think make it’s time get out before you hurt youselves or someone else.”
I don’t know what you are trying to express here, but I know it’s time that America wakes up, opened it’s eyes, and SEES exactly what is happening to their country.
I feel the same way. But I AM voting for McPain anyway.
What the scariest thing you can see?
A Ron Paul supporter.
Yes. Right to life; freedom to choose not to. Right to keep my political views to myself; freedom to express them. Right to peaceably assemble; freedom to avoid political rallies. Right to worship; freedom to stay home.
In other words, I believe in inalienable rights, protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Why?
Well said.
I notice you wrote "four years of McCain." That's a reminder that - depending upon what McCain might actually do in those four years and his health at that time - McCain either might not seek a second term in 2012 would be vulnerable to a GOP primary challenge by a conservative.
I seriously doubt that Clinton and Obama will run together on the same ticket. There is too much legitimate bad blood between them and it might even get worse.
Imagine how the MSM will play her up again if she won both, regardless if she still trailed in the delegate count.
I don’t know how you can possibly forecast out to 2016, unless you have some divine capabilities. I wouldn’t even be certain that we would have a legitimate presidential election by then, especially if the ‘Rats control the government.
Many countries have had elections at one time, then ceased to have them. The US may have the strongest history of republican government on the planet, but even that is no guarantee for the future, considering how we have been losing freedoms over the past several decades.
Let’s hope that we will never again see a Democrat in the White House, and that the Democratic Party will go the way of the Federalists and the Whigs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.