Hillary Derangement Syndrome
About Dick Morris’ latest theory on Obama pulling an LBJ-meets-Grover Cleveland gambit
Dick Morris has been making the rounds with his latest theory that Barack Obama will pull an LBJ and not seek re-election next year (knowing he is certain to lose), so that he can actually come back to run for the presidency again in 2016 or 2020, Grover Cleveland-style.
I don’t have time to give this a lengthy treatment, but maybe it doesn’t even need one to express how ridiculous this concept is.
The jury’s still out on which part of Obama’s ego will prevail regarding 2012; will it be the side that’s horrified at the thought of losing the election (in which case he’ll just not run again) or the part of him that is so in love with the trappings of office that he can’t bear to step aside? If it’s the latter, he’ll no doubt wait until the last possible moment to pull out of the race, so the Democrats will be screwed royally and unable to put forward a candidate for 2012 (and stop fantasizing about Hillary Clinton being the 2012 nominee, because she knows a Democrat won’t win after the mess Obama has made and she will not allow herself to be used as a sacrifice so that Democrats immediately after her loss can say, “It’s all Hillary’s fault! We would have won if Obama was still on the ticket! Let’s run Obama again in 2016 and give him another chance!”).
The Democrat Party has a real come to Jesus moment ahead of it, which is amusing since so many on the Left hate Christianity with a passion and put all their faith in the false god-with-a-decidedly-small-g that is Obama. Either the party completely purges itself of Obama and his acolytes after the 2012 election and marginalizes the Left to a role of non-influence in the party, or Democrats are toast for the foreseeable future.
The Obama presidency has redefined what it means to be a Democrat, and MILLIONS of former Democrats — such as myself — want nothing to ever again do with the party because of the deliberate lurch to the Left the Democrat Party took in 2008 when it cast aside Hillary Clinton and all the moderate/conservative Democrats who supported her in favor of the Left’s darling Obama.
If Obama doesn’t seek a second term and instead tries to maintain control of the Democrat Party to preserve an opportunity to return in 2016 or 2020 as the standard-bearer again, then Democrats will never have an opportunity to correct the way Independents now see Democrats.
If the Party is to survive, it needs to de-Obamafy, and quickly…and ensure that everyone associated with Obama’s rise to power never again plays a visible role in the Democrat Party.
Personally, though I still don’t know whether Obama will run for a second term, I can’t imagine him WANTING another term.
I also can’t picture him ever attempting a run for the White House again, even if the Democrat Party was foolish enough to run him in 2016.
Obama never wanted to be President…he’s always wanted to be an ex-president, with all the trappings, wealth, and fame that come with that. He wanted a place in the history books and a life dedicated to giving speeches, holding book signings, and traveling the world in the lap of luxury. Running for President was a means to this end.
Why on Earth would he ever want to leave the plush retirement the post-presidency affords to once again be responsible for actually doing things on a daily basis in the White House?
Besides, it does not take much imagination to realize Obama’s breathlessly awaiting his chance to usurp Jimmy Carter as the former US President who travels the world criticizing America, hating Israel, and doing his very best to embarrass Americans and promote Islam. That’s been his goal all along, to achieve a lifetime appointment on the national stage as America’s loudest critic.
In 2013, after he leaves the White House, if he plans on running for anything ever again it will be UN Secretary General, where he’ll happily condemn the United States while speaking for this “world body”.
Dick Morris is a colorful and interesting man who must see this as well, but just wants the attention garnered from using LBJ and Grover Cleveland in the same sentence and causing a little stir the way he has been this week.
Three Reasons Hillary Clinton Will Never Be Barack Obama’s VP in 2012 — and an Implication for President Palin in 2016
HillBuzz.org was originally conceived as a Hillary Clinton 2008 presidential campaign supporters’ site. Though our focus has shifted since then, and everyone involved with HB has left the Democrat Party for good at this point, HillBuzz Founder and Editor-in-Chief Kevin DuJan still follows Hillary Clinton’s career with great interest and appreciates her serving the country as the sole grown up in the entire Obama administration. Here’s Kevin’s Top Three Reasons Hillary Clinton Will Never Be Barack Obama’s VP in 2012 (So Stop Fantasizing About It):
Clearly, S.E. Cupp needs a primer on how the Race Industry works in America, because there’s no way Hillary Clinton could challenge Obama for the 2012 election
Here’s a column by S.E. Cupp that makes me wonder if she pays any attention at all to the Race Industry in America. Cupp is usually so smart about most things, so I also wonder if this is part of some strategy on the right to try to encourage more dissatisfaction with Obama by pushing the pipedream that Hillary Clinton could really challenge him for the 2012 presidential nomination.
To put it simply, Clinton can’t challenge Obama because he is a sitting black president, and Clinton challenging a sitting black president would make her public enemy number one in the black community.
Obama and his surrogates, like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Henry Gates, and most especially his own wife Michelle, would 24/7 brand Hillary the most racist of all racists for daring to — and quote me, because this is the exact verbiage these surrogates would use — “take this away from the black man”.
Perhaps Cupp’s real intent is to try to goad Hillary into committing political suicide, because blacks would never forgive any Democrat who challenged Obama for the 2012 nomination. Just think about the scenarios that flow naturally out of this:
(1) Obama remains the Democrats’ nominee, but goes on to lose the general election. Blacks would say that Obama lost because Hillary weakened and distracted him — so it’s all her fault the presidency was “taken away from the black man”.
(2) Obama loses the Democrats’ nomination to Hillary, and Hillary then loses the presidency. Blacks will raise Hades for the next four years demanding Obama for the 2016 nominee, since “Hillary stole it from him in 2012″ and then lost. Not only would Hillary be blamed for losing the presidency, but she’d have to watch the DNC remain in Obama’s hands another four years, with him trying to be a second Grover Cleveland.
(3) Hillary takes the nomination from Obama and then somehow manages to win the general election, with the black voters Democrats depend on openly hating her and refusing to vote on election day. Folks, there is just no way for Hillary Clinton to become president if blacks are not supporting her, and they won’t support her if they believe (or are encouraged to think by Obama surrogates) that Hillary “stole” anything from Obama.
Even if Obama pulls an LBJ and decides not to run in 2012 (an increasingly likely scenario), blacks will be so upset Obama’s not on the ticket that they’ll likely sit 2012 out, to punish the party for Obama’s absence. Even if he tells blacks directly that he decided not to run for another term, the Race Industry will whisper it’s all a conspiracy to take the presidency away from Obama.
The Race Industry always needs a new conspiracy to run on, so Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Henry Gates, and the rest have something to do with their lives. When the Obamas are out of the White House, they too will actively participate in these race-baiting shenanigans so they never have to surrender the life of luxury they’ve become so accustomed to.
S.E. Cupp is a terrific writer and right more often then she’s wrong, but clearly she has no idea how the Race Industry operates if she honestly believes in any of this “Hillary 2012″ wishcasting.
Unless, of course, this is just a strategy in conservative circles to further encourage the ongoing Democrat Civil War and make more Democrats feel very “We should have picked Hillary!” as the 2012 election revs up.
Are conservatives really this blind to how the Race Industry actually works and how much Democrats are held hostage by these goon squads?
5 Ways Mitt Romney Sets the Stage for Hillary Clinton in 2016
Obama’s presidency is lost, with no hope of repeating the hopeychange phenomenon that caused Independents to vote for him in 2008 (while keeping millions of conservative voters at home, either because they didn’t feel McCain was conservative enough and they needed “to teach someone a lesson about something” or because they fell victim to the media’s prompting that they needed to prove how not-racist they were…and the only way to do that was to not vote against “the historic and unprecedented first black president”…so they sat their sorry butts home on their couches and drank a lot of Pepsi, allowing everything that’s happened the last three years under Obama to transpire).
The media has been aggressively pushing Mittens “Mood Ring” Romney for the GOP’s 2012 nomination, even more aggressively than the Left pushed for John McCain to be the 2008 GOP nominee (or for Bob Dole to be the GOP’s pick in 1996). While it’s clear the media works tirelessly to select the Republican it feels will most likely lose to the Democrat in every major election, it’s fascinating to watch the nonstop push for Romney considering how likely it is Obama will lose to whomever Republicans nominate to run against him.
The question then becomes, “Why does the media want Mittens so badly, when even Mittens will most likely beat Obama?”.
Simple.
Democrats are already looking beyond the Obama 2012 loss…and are trying to set the stage for Republicans’ defeat in 2016, when one-term Mittens would face Hillary Clinton in the next “historic election”.
Here are five ways Democrats are thinking ahead, past 2012, to setup a scenario for Hillary Clinton to be president in 2016.
Something conservatives should keep in mind: not all former Democrats (or even current Dems) are “libs”, “Liberals”, or Leftists
There’s something that happens here, and on other sites, every once in a while that I personally read as a pejorative, even if I know 100% it’s not meant to be; it’s when someone refers to me as a “former lib”, a “reformed Liberal”, or even — most ridiculously — “a onetime Leftist”.
I was NEVER (bold, ALL-CAPS, NEVER) a “lib” or a “Liberal” or a Leftist…even if I spent my first 30 years or so of life being a Democrat.
Really, the first 16 years or so of that wasn’t a choice of mine, because growing up in a Democrat household in Cleveland, Ohio in the 1980s and 1990s meant there were pictures of John and Jackie Kennedy up on all our walls…until they were replaced by photos of Hillary and Bill Clinton in 1992.
In grade school, I remember Sister Mary Howard asking our third grade class what the difference between Democrats and Republicans was…and I raised my hand to say “Democrats are good and Republicans are evil”. As a child, with few frames of reference, I boiled politics down to something I could understand from the TV shows and movies I liked. Transformers. Thundercats. Jem. Star Wars.
I thought Democrats were the Autobots, Thundercats, Holograms, and Rebel Alliance…and Republicans were the Decepticons, the Mutants, the Misfits, and the Evil Galactic Empire.
I politically came of age in the early 1990s, when the Clintons — through immense personal effort — dragged the Democrat party kicking and screaming towards the center. To this day, the Clintons are hated by many in Democrat party ranks for this. It is why Hillary Clinton is not sitting in her Oval Office right now…and the reason the Democrat party worked so hard against her to make Obama the 2008 nominee and current president. Because the Clintons are not Leftists…no matter how much many of you in conservative ranks have claimed through the years that they are. If you want to see Leftists, look at the Obamas. If you don’t think there would be any difference between an Obama and a Clinton presidency, then I am sorry to tell you that you are nuts. Multiply by 100 every bad thing you ever thought about the Clintons, or ever irrational nightmare fantasy written about them, and you will only just scratch the surface on how Leftist and dangerous the Obama presidency is.
This site began as a Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign site. Since Hillary is no longer in politics, and this is a political site, Hillary is no longer the focus of HillBuzz. You can think whatever you want of her, and I do not proselytize for the Clintons, but my support for Hillary Clinton does not brand me a “lib”, “Liberal”, or Leftist.
I honestly would rather be called a cannibal than a “lib”, or even “former lib”, since that’s like calling me a “former cannibal”.
I consider the words “lib”, “Liberal”, and Leftist to be pejoratives.
It horrifies me whenever I see someone describe me as “a former lib who saw the light and became conservative”.
No.
That’s not what happened at all.
I was a centrist who grew up in a centrist Democrat household that hated Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, and essentially all the fools who hijacked the Democrat party and ran it into the ground after President Kennedy was assassinated. If he had lived, and if he was still around today, President Kennedy would be a REPUBLICAN.
Once upon a time, Democrats did not want to see this country destroyed. They didn’t want government spending to race out of control and didn’t want tax dollars funneled endlessly into the labor unions, so the unions could pump the cash back into the DNC in a taxpayer stick ‘em up pyramid scheme.
Absent the arrival of the Clintons on the scene in 1992…in an alternate universe where Mario Cuomo or Paul Tsongas or Jerry Brown became the presidential nominee instead of then Governor Clinton…I bet I would have voted Republican that year…and every year since.
They are the only reasons I decided to pull Democrat levers for so long…so it’s fitting that the betrayal of the Clintons by the Democrat party, and the grotesque lurch to the far Left the party has taken with Obama as standard bearer, is what divorced me from the Democrat party for good.
If the ghost of Sister Mary Howard ever asked me again what the difference between Democrats and Republicans is, I’d raise my hand and say “Democrats are Leftists who hate America and want to turn this into a Third World thogocracy while Republicans for the most part are Cocktail Party establishment buffoons too afraid of their own shadows to stand up to Democrat bullies and radicals”.
I am a conservative.
A gay conservative.
I am a guy who spent every cent he had and gave up his life for two years to elect Hillary Clinton president…and who is ready, willing, and hopefully able to do the same thing to elect Sarah Palin our next president.
I know it is my destiny that this will forever perplex a great many of you out there. I have answered repeatedly how and why I can support both of these extraordinary women…in the moments of time when I believe they were the best choice on the field to lead America when the country needed them.
Hillary Clinton would have made a much better president than Obama, John McCain, or anyone in the 2008 race.
Sarah Palin will make a much better president than anyone else alive I can think of at the moment, save for possibly Allen West.
In the future, if one of you reading this appears on the horizon as the best choice in my opinion, I might possibly champion you…and put everything I have in life into your campaign.
Because I love this country more than I could ever tell you, and I would never want to be associated with those who wish to see it harmed, who want America “changed at its core” in ways that turn us at best into a failed European socialist dystopia and more realistically into a Central or South American, African, or Middle Eastern thug-controlled garbage heap.
So, it honestly does boil my blood to be called “a former lib” or a “reformed Liberal”…when I was never, ever anything like that.
It horrifies me that some of you think this, because I take this to mean you believe that at one point in my life I would have sided against this country and only now see this as a bad thing to do.
It’s preposterous and more than a little hurtful to me.
And it’s worth mentioning because I see conservatives do this a lot, actually…in terms of the tens of millions of former Democrats who were alienated by the Obama lurch to the Left in 2008.
It is beyond madness for conservatives to give these people any pause about voting Republican now. Shouting, “Hey lookit, Suzie used to be a cannibal but now she wants to come to the hotdog cookout like a normal person…and she won’t be eating anyone there this time!” would be strange to your ears.
Calling me, and all the former Dems I know like me, “ex libs” or “reformed Liberals” is bizarre too.
The right terminology to use is “former Democrat”. If you really want to get hyper accurate and ultra specific, you can say “former Centrist Democrat Hillary supporters”, which I’d wager 99% of us are.
Not everyone who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primaries is now voting Republican under Obama…but I bet almost all former Democrats who now identify as Republican in the Golden Age of Hope and Change we currently live in were Hillary voters three years ago.
There is a reason for that: because we were never “libs”, “Liberals”, Leftists, or whatever you want to call the lunatics who control the Democrat party completely today.
So please don’t slander us with those pejoratives.
Save them for the loons who really deserve them.
**************************
NOTE: It’s always dangerous when reading anything I write on this site or anywhere my work is published to assume I am talking about YOU, specifically, or something YOU, individually, did…where you think YOU prompted or inspired whatever that post was about.
I am not shy. Trust me, if you did something I thought was counterproductive or any sort of attack on me or the site, you would hear personally from me about it. And it would not be via an essay on HB, it would more likely than not be in an email asking why you did whatever it was to us.
Tonight a dozen or so people wrote in wondering if something they said today or yesterday made me write the above post regarding the “lib/Liberal/Leftist” pejoratives.
Actually, this note was prompted by a conservative site I like that talked about the recent HB 3.0 upgrade in an article that gave us kudos for the redesign. As stated at the very beginning, the person who called me a “reformed lib” didn’t mean any harm and didn’t really think about what he was saying. To him “Democrat” and “lib/Liberal/Leftist” are all synonymous. Which might be the case today, with the Obama Democrat party as your reference, but it was not the case while I was a Democrat for all those years in the Clinton Democrat party.
Do you know how the word “gay” used to exclusively mean “happy” or “high-spirited”, so when watching old movies immature people today giggle uncontrollably whenever “gay” is used to describe people who are clearly not homosexual? Well, words sometimes change and become co-opted in unforeseen ways. So someone who may have described him or herself as “gay” in 1920 in hopes of nailing their gregarious nature in a bio might very well blush in 2011 now that the terminology has taken on a radically different meaning.
Honestly, this is what even the word “Democrat” itself feels like in this the Golden Age of Hope and Change under Obama. I still can’t believe that every single Democrat in the Senate voted for the Obamacare bill on Christmas Eve in 2009 without even reading it…including people I had liked for my entire adult life, like supposedly “centrist” Evan Bayh, whom I had gotten to know fairly well during Hillary’s 2008 campaign when I worked events in Indiana every day in the runup to that primary.
When Bayh walked into the Senate to vote with all the loons like Claire McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Russ Feingold and others who gleefully backed the economy-killing horror of Obamacare – WITHOUT EVER READING IT FIRST – I knew the word I used to know as “Democrat” now meant something else entirely for all intents and purposes, since Obama had redefined the party so drastically.
So don’t be too hard on anyone who labeled themselves a Democrat prior to 2008…and appreciate just how radically the party altered itself in just the last three years.
Remember, also, that you should never be too quick to tar someone with a brush that should be reserved for the very worst peolpe belonging to a group, just because that person calls themselves a “Democrat”, “Republican”, or whatever.
It would be like someone misguided calling you a “rightwinger” just because you are a Republican and lumping you in the same boat as the lunatic fringe of the GOP (or, even worse, assuming you’re like Olympia Snow, Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, and other terrible Cocktail Party buffoons just because you all put an (R) after your name and favor spotlessly dry-cleaned blazers).
I doubt lifelong Republicans who focus on fiscal responsibility and limited government enjoy being linked to the loons of the GOP on the far right or the useful (to Democrats) idiots in the Cocktail Party crowd.
So, yes, I am a former Democrat. I am a reformed Democrat. I am an ex-Democrat. I am a gay Hillary Clinton supporting Democrat who left the party because it deliberately veered to the Left and party leaders like Donna Brazile, Howard Dean, and others decided bitter-clinging-Midwesterners with conservative beliefs were no longer welcome in Democrat ranks.
But I am not and never have been a lib, Liberal, or Leftist any more than I bet a single one of you reading this has ever been a “rightwinger nutjob”, as the Media likes to call members of that dangerous fringe.
Somehow, this too is her fault: man in Hillary Clinton mask robs bank
Why not run a picture of the mask, since it's a story about a Hillary Clinton mask being used in something?
My boyfriend Justin is one of those people who grew up hating Hillary Clinton, and still hates her, though he admits he doesn’t know why. ”Because she killed that man”, is something he says most often when pressed about this.
“What man?”, I ask him, knowing he won’t remember. ”Vince Vaughn”, he said once. So, I brought IMDB.com up on my phone and showed him that no, Vince Vaughn was alive and well and living in Hollywood. Hillary Clinton did not murder him.
Yet.
Justin’s parents are big Hillary Derangement Syndrome chronic cases, and believe she is behind all sorts of nefarious plots and schemes. ”She killed Tim Russert! She gave Ted Kennedy a brain tumor! She sabotaged that one man’s plane because she was jealous of him, and she had been on that plane right before him, so she had the opportunity to do it!”.
Honestly, I don’t know what to say about this anymore.
But, I do think it’s hilarious that in this article at Politico about a man robbing a bank wearing a Hillary Clinton mask (just like in that movie Point Break with the ex-presidents bank robbers), the editor ran an actual picture of Hillary Clinton…and not the mask. As if people don’t know who “Hillary Clinton” is, and thus needed that visual of her.
“Oh, yah, HER. I knew that name sounded familiar. She’s the one that killed Vince Vaughn, on that plane, with her heart attack ray. Oh, that’s a really good mask of her. So lifelike”.
Hillarious.
