Clinton strategy now a knock off of AIPAC strategy

There have been several diaries written about AIPAC, the secretive right wing Republican political action committee and powerful lobbying group that claims to stand for what's good for Israel. Their weapon of choice against critics who dare suggest that hard line policies have made Israel less safe and the Middle East more violent, is to call that person an anti-Semite and hope they shut up.

The goal is to shut out any criticism, even from serious, well-informed, honest brokers.

Hillary Clinton has taken a page from AIPAC's play book to avoid the bed she herself has made but refuses to lie in. Her latest weapon of choice is gender. "THEY WON'T LET ME WIN BECAUSE I'M A WOMAN AND EVERY WOMAN IS BEING DENIED HER BIRTHRIGHT IF I AM NOT ELECTED PRESIDENT".

Actually, this is only her most recent ploy to manipulate the emotions of her supporters. Others that have been diaried about have included ethnicity, race and culture, the divides that keep us from paying attention to the big things we have in common, like economic well-being, environmental sustainability and so on.

 

Much as AIPAC must really believe they are helping Israel by pushing counterproductive aggressive military policies instead of forging peaceful conflict resolution based on the key issues, Senator Clinton probably believes that she is the best one and deserves to be president.

Senator Clinton, as far as I'm concerned, made her bed when she voted for the Iraq War Resolution. I knew at the time that the unintended consequences of a war we did not need to fight would be borne by American soldiers and innocent Iraqis although I never imagined how hideously costly it would be. Senator Clinton to this day has shown no public remorse for all that heartache. I knew when the vote took place that I could never easily support a Senator who failed this test. That was her chance to shine as, yes, a woman, but alas she chose to show her famous toughness meant to live up to the my way or the highway wrongheaded policies driven by some in Washington at the expense of our democratic principles, financial well-being and moral authority.

Senator Clinton has used divisive tactics to win pitched battles, while losing the high moral ground on shared goals.

One of the most divisive wedge issues this country has faced recently has been on abortion. Right to life vs abortion rights has been the battle cries mobilizing powerful political forces behind both sides of the two party system.

Like every other important issue we face, there's a lot more than just the rhetorical sound bites that both the right and left have been flinging at each other, while rallying behind their like-minded candidates.

Sweden, according to a Harvard School of Public Health sociologist who was interviewed on public television a few years ago, has the most liberal abortion laws and the fewest abortions per capita. Why? because Sweden offers birth control, adoption services, housing assistance, jobs, prenatal care, day care, and a host of options where a person can make an informed personal decision, free from financial pressures.

Why would any legislator, man or woman, choose to ride one side or another of these differences instead of trying to help us cut through the inflammatory rhetoric that has kept us from reaching a sound set of policies, honoring constitutionally guaranteed privacy rights while respecting those who think there is a moral dimension to life in the womb?
Sweden's solution is one possibility that might come close to satisfying people on both sides of this divide.

I have not heard one politician, including Senator Clinton, try to move forward on solving this divisive political wedge issue so that it isn't used time and again during the election cycle to distract us from the fact that we are being robbed blind by a new generation of robber barons who have driven us to the edge of a geopolitical/environmental/financial cliff.

As the grandmother of three beautiful, brilliant, talented, loving godesses....oops got carried away there...I am saddened to see the vitriol and anger amongst some of Senator Clinton's feminist supporters, like those who wrote letters to NARAL because they have put gender and gender issues above all else. And I think that Senator Clinton would serve this constituency well if she resisted inflaming peoples' emotions and acknowledged that Senator Obama would be a president who was very sensitive to women's issues as he said pointing to his own two daughters that he clearly loves.

I agree with Barack Obama, that Hillary Clinton has probably gotten a lot of people who might otherwise have been in denial, that one day a woman will be president of this country.

But she won't be president because she's a woman, she'll be president because she is trusted to be the best leader.