Hil­lary Clin­ton for pres­i­dent?

The Washington Times Weekly - - Editorials -

Pres­sure is mount­ing on Barack Obama to throw in the cards and an­nounce that he won’t seek re-elec­tion as pres­i­dent. Sur­pris­ingly, the push is com­ing from the left. This has many in main­stream Amer­ica scratch­ing their heads ask­ing why lib­er­als want to dump the most hard-left pres­i­dent in Amer­i­can his­tory.

The an­swer is they’re wor­ried Mr. Obama has moved too far, too fast — and re­vealed too much of their big-govern­ment agenda — to win a sec­ond term. This is Hil­lary Clin­ton’s mo­ment.

Peren­nial Green Party can­di­date Ralph Nader summed up the rad­i­cals’ griev­ance with the first black com­man­der in chief.

“Noth­ing’s worse than an in­cum­bent pres­i­dent slip­ping in the polls, be­ing con­stantly on the de­fen­sive, be­ing ac- cused by sup­port­ers of hav­ing no back­bone and run­ning an un­en­thu­si­as­ti­cally re­ceived cam­paign,” ex­plained Mr. Nader on Sept. 19.

“That’s a pre­scrip­tion for de­feat.” He went on to list the Wall Street bailouts, “a uni­lat­eral war in Libya,” ex­tend­ing wars in Afghanistan and Pak­istan and los­ing the debt-ceil­ing de­bate to Repub­li­cans as more jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for dump­ing Mr. Obama.

The New York Times has led the charge against “The One.”

Pulitzer Prize-win­ning colum­nist Mau­reen Dowd has been de­light­fully harsh in her crit­i­cism not only of the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion but of Mr. Obama per­son­ally.

“Is Obama so iso­lated he can’t see that Amer­i­cans are curled up in a ball, beaten down by a fi­nan­cial cri­sis, an iden­tity cri­sis, a po­lit­i­cal cri­sis and a lead­er­ship cri­sis?” she asked in a re­cent col­umn.

“The White House team is flail­ing — re­act­ing, re­group­ing, re­trench­ing. It’s re­pug­nant,” she com­plained in an­other. This pres­i­dent is in real trou­ble when he’s lost the sup­port of the old Gray Lady (that lady be­ing the New York Times, not Miss Dowd).

All the friendly fire is enough to make one feel sorry for Barry, al­most.

Af­ter tak­ing big-govern­ment to record lev­els and suc­cess­fully di­min­ish­ing U.S. in­flu­ence abroad, he would seem to be every­thing the “Blame Amer­ica First” crowd would want.

But as con­ser­va­tive ra­dio icon Rush Lim­baugh re­minded on his show last week:

“Obama has de­stroyed more jobs than any pres­i­dent in modern his­tory.” Many Democrats un­der­stand this is a po­lit­i­cal li­a­bil­ity in an elec­tion year when lots of un­em­ployed blue-col­lar union work­ers that make up their base are des­per­ate for change.

Panic is set­ting in that Mr. Obama will go down to de­feat as a mar­tyr for the cause and take the cause with him.

It’s not that lib­er­als dis­agree with Mr. Obama’s Key­ne­sian spend­ing spree, the crip­pling debt he’s stacked up or his coun­ter­cul­tural so­cial poli­cies.

They love it all, but that doesn’t mat­ter if the pop­u­lace re­volts and puts ele­phants in charge of the White House and both cham­bers of Congress. Then their rev­o­lu­tion is dead. The left needs a can­di­date who is a true believer but will­ing to put on a mod­er­ate false face to hood­wink Mid­dle Amer­ica.

It may be time for Hil­lary to make her move.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.