Is he the best the democrats have to
offer?
The sad thing is, the answer to that question is yes. One longs for the days when the Democratic party had people integrity (even if, on occasion, yes, they "strayed" sexually, but not qith subordinates in their office, and not lying about it under oath). I think of FDR, Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson, Bobby Kennedy, people with integrity, people who understood true liberialism, and didn't embrace welfare socialism and call it liberalism. Surprisingly, the moderate Republicans in many cases are closer to true liberalism than the Democrats are these days.
Sadly, now that Moynihan is gone, I don't see any serious Democrats who have the degree of personal integrity that the party used to embrace back 30 years or so ago when I was proud to call myself a liberal Democrat.
So, unfortunately, the answer is that Clinton IS the best they have to offer. Which is why there are far more Republican elected officials in this country than Democratic.
BTW, a recent thread here was on viable women candidates. Did you notice that Elizabeth Dole will probably announce? Unquestionably a viable candidate--but not from the Democratic party, who won't even have a non-viable woman candidate for President. And Arizona, home of Barry Goldwater, inducted five women for the top five elected spots in the state government -- and four of the five were Republcians. |
