Hillary Clinton for President

L. R. Laverde-HansenStarred Page By L. R. Laverde-Hansen, 24th Mar 2015 | Follow this author | RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/3_qg5r_i/
Posted in Wikinut>Writing>Columns & Opinions

On Sunday, April 12, 2015, Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to announce her candidacy for president. Here is my unqualified endorsement of the former Secretary of State and Senator from New York.

A Coming Announcement

According to close sources, former First Lady, former Senator and former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to announce her candidacy for the Presidency of the United States this Sunday, April 11, 2014.

Ms. Clinton is widely believed to be the likely Democratic nominee for president, despite movement in the left of her party to champion alternative candidates such as Elizabeth Warren. Below are my reasons, why I believe Hillary Rodham Clinton should be the next President of the United States of America.

Experience

Seldom has there been a candidate for president in all of American history with the totality of experience--man or woman--similar to that of Hillary. We have had candidates with experience in the Legislative branch, such as Senators, Congresspersons, etc.; or presidents coming from some form of the executive, be they former governors or members of earlier Presidential Cabinets. Rarely have we had candidates with both.

As a Senator, who was reelected by her constituents, Hillary knows what it takes to meet the demands of voters. She was praised for her time in the Senate as a "workhorse" and not a "showhorse." That means that she was willing to get things done.

Though she lost to Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries, she accepted and served as his Secretary of State. For four years she handled crises all over the world and managed America's leadership role in the continuing fight against terrorism and the emergence of Asia in the 21st Century. In spite of numerous challenges, her tenure at the State Department is generally reckoned a success. Hillary was one of the key Obama Administration officials to approve of the raid against Usama bin Laden in 2011.

It has always amazed me that in Presidential politics, experience is considered a liability. Part of this is because if any one has made a mistake, we consider this to be a disqualification. For example, in 2002 as Senator, Hillary voted along with most of the Congress to authorize President George W. Bush's use of force regarding Iraq. Given what has happened in the ten years since, that is considered to be a major mistake, even one of the reasons Barack Obama was able to defeat her. However, that was a very hard vote to make, and President Obama was not in the U.S. Congress then. To deny a president full authority to use force can tie his or her hands, so it was understandable that she made the decision she did. The truth is that someone who has never made a major mistake is someone who has never tried to do anything of substance, and certainly has never learned anything from it.

Leadership

Hillary is someone not only with a resume, but a record of forty years of sterling achievement. After graduating from Yale Law School (where she met her husband Bill), she went on to work for the Children's Defense Fund, a charity committed to helping the lives of children. In the words of its founder and President, Marian Wright Edelman:

CDF is pleased to recognize Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been a tireless voice for children. She’s brilliant. She cares deeply about children. She perseveres. She’s an incredibly hard worker, and she stays with it. She’s done extraordinarily well in everything she’s ever done

Afterwards, when her husband was Governor of Arkansas, she was not only First Lady there, but worked to improve the education there. She worked with people to implement policy on the state level.

As First Lady of the United States, she led the health care task Force which really brought to light the need for health care reform in this country. It failed to become law in the Congress, but it set the groundwork which made President Obama's health care initiatives the supreme law of the land.

In 1995 she addressed the United Nations' Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China. There she made her famous statement, "that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights..." This line from her speech became a rallying cry for many. Twenty years later, women from around the world continue to admire Hillary Rodham Clinton as a leader in the cause of women's rights.

Moderate Politics

One of the big criticisms about Hillary from conservatives is that she is too liberal. I knew a Republican woman who claims she was a former Communist. It's true she has friends who probably are more on the left than she. Her policies, however, as a middle of the road as you can get. As one columnist put it, "(Hillary) is more conservative than most Democrats, and ironically, most Republicans would ever admit."

On the other side, many leftists wanted her to be more liberal. They look for a more progressive voice, such as an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. The truth is, admirable as those figures are, neither one will be elected president in 2016.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is that rare figure who has the brilliance, the experience and the real-world and world-wide knowledge of what leadership requires at this point in the 21st Century. She will make an excellent President of the United States. As I did in 2008, I urge my fellow Americans to support Hillary Rodham Clinton to be our next President. We are so lucky to have someone so qualified and so willing to serve the public interest.


Composed in New York
April 9-11, 2015

Tags

2016, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton 2016, Hillary For President, Hillary Rodham Clinton

Meet the author

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
Poet, playwright, commentator. I write wherever I can. Currently I reside in the City of New York.

Share this page

moderator Mark Gordon Brown moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

author avatar pohtiongho
12th Apr 2015 (#)

I believe it will be a good choice. She has the leadership materials.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
12th Apr 2015 (#)

Thank you, good sir.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
12th Apr 2015 (#)

Does the US really want to led again by someone of such advanced years?

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
12th Apr 2015 (#)

Ageism, John? I can understand philosophical/ideological reservations about a candidate, but ageism? Was de Gaulle too old for France? Adenauer for Germany?

Actually I am ageist in favor of older leaders (as long as their minds are sharp). Since John F. Kennedy, too many Presidents have come to the job with too little experience. Capable as they have been, we have had to watch them learn on the job for a year or more. We won't have to with Hillary.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
12th Apr 2015 (#)

In their later years I would say that the answer in both cases was Yes - and it was certainly true of Ronald Reagan, who made some disastrous decisions due to increasing senility.

As somebody once said, old men are dangerous as leaders because they tend to have little concern for what will happen in the not-too-distant future.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
6th Feb 2016 (#)

Funny, John. Donald Trump is a year older than Hillary. Bernie Sanders is six years older than Hillary, and hardly anyone seems to be bringing it up. Ageism?--Maybe it's sexism.

Reply to this comment

author avatar M G Singh
13th Apr 2015 (#)

She won't make a good president. Not because of age, Thatcher and Indira Gandhi were not young, but I feel she lacks dynamism. In any case she will lose.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Yes, she certainly has experience abandoning ambassadors, leaving them to fend for themselves to their death in tinder-hot places like Benghazi. Even more experience in covering it up and getting away with, well, murder. Murderer Hillary for president. It has a ring.

Yes, she has been affiliated with elected authorities, but that does not qualify her as having leadership. Nor does earning a college degree, being married to a president or addressing a conference. Hillary's leadership is better described as being a political hack.

As for having moderate politics, I will give you that on Hillary. But, anybody looks moderate compared to the extreme, even radical, left politico we have occupying the White House right now. If anything, Hillary is too moderate to win. Extreme whacko liberal, Elizabeth Warren, will kill Hill politically. The Party is now in the hands of extremists.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Well John anything that's extreme, sure. But Hillary will be 69 at the time of the next election. And 69 today is not 69 of even a generation ago.

All I know is who wasn't charmed by JFK? Yet it was Khrushchev (nearly 70) who had the sense not to blow the world up back in 1962.

Reply to this comment

author avatar pohtiongho
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Indeed there was going to be a big fight in 1962. We were lucky because an old man believed this: Pride comes before a fall.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
16th Apr 2015 (#)

Thank you, sir.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Thank you, Madan. I don't know what her campaign will be like, but if recent history has been any guide, Hillary always learns from her mistakes.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Apr 2015 (#)

First of all LeRain, thank you, because I can tell you read my piece. I wish more critics read before they attacked.

Secondly, calling an elected or government official a murderer is a serious charge. By the rationale, was President Ronald Reagan a "murderer" for letting over 200 of our brave Marines get killed by a suicide bomber in Beirut back in 1983?

I would actually say no on all counts. Governments have the right to defend themselves, and unfortunately terrible casualties sometimes result.

What I love about my country is that we are so much more than our misdeeds and tragedies. This year we celebrate the 150 anniversary of the end of the Civil War, which instead of dividing our nation, unified it further. Additionally we also cut out the cancer of slavery, which basically required the biggest sacrifice in our history, what Lincoln called, "the last full measure of devotion."

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
21st Apr 2015 (#)

Slavery indeed ended with the Civil War, L.R., but it did anything but unite the country. We are as polarized as ever on the racism issue. If you doubt that, have a look at my recent Wiki article on Shelby Steele's book, "Shame, How America's Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country." Better yet read the book, a black man's perspective on destructive liberal policies toward so-called "equality."

Reply to this comment

author avatar Carol Roach
13th Apr 2015 (#)

If I was American I would certainly vote for her

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Thank you so much, Carol. I'm Impressed how you and John Welford and some other new wikinuters put out so much fresh content. Kudos!

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Well, we shall see. However, I would personally rather see countries led by people in their 50s than their 70s - they should have quite enough experience by then but without the added risks that overage can add.

I have always found it strange that we expect people in most occupations to retire in their mid-60s but make an exception in the case of leaders who have some of the most important decisions of all in their hands.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Apr 2015 (#)

Very well argued, John. Even if I don't absolutely agree with you, you do raise some valid concerns. Leadership of a government is a different level of responsibility.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Stella Mitchell
16th Apr 2015 (#)

Age , in my humble opinion , isn't the factor here L.R. ...but ability , and whether she is the President GOD wants for the USA in these times .
Bless you
Stella ><

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
16th Apr 2015 (#)

I hope people will leave religion well out of the reckoning when it comes to choosing a President.

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Atheists have stood for office before now, but they would hardly be allowed to admit it!

What has certainly been clear is that many Presidents have done things in office that they definitely didn't learn from reading the Bible!

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
16th Apr 2015 (#)

Absolutely, Stella!

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
16th Apr 2015 (#)

Understand, John. Fascinating how so many in Britain are so tuned into our Presidential election next year. Thus begins the horse race.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
16th Apr 2015 (#)

LR, I haven't been aware of quite so much interest being shown in the nail-biting contest currently under way in the UK!

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
16th Apr 2015 (#)

John, I'm so far behind. Still getting over that tense vote re: Scotland.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
16th Apr 2015 (#)

LR, May 7th is the day we vote and - this being the UK - May 8th is the day that the new government gets started!

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
19th Apr 2015 (#)

I must say, John, it always impresses me how unceremoniously governments change in Britain. Heck, in America, some secretaries take longer to clean out their desks.
And if you like, my name is Lyonel--for my friends (as opposed to my byline). A fine English name, I believe.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
13th Jul 2015 (#)

Hillary is highly qualified but a question regarding her and Bush is do we want these political dynasties?

She is being pulled dangerously to the left by Bernie Sanders. Let's hope if she secures the nomination she will have sense enough to move back toward the center for the general election. This is what Romney forgot to do after being pulled so far to the right for the GOP primaries in 2012.

And Hillary should select Ed Rendell, the former governor of Pennsylvania, to be her running mate. He can fill in a lot of her gaps, he is a good campaigner and he can take it to his opponent in a debate format.

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Jul 2015 (#)

Thank you, Henry. I think Hillary should be judged on her own merits, separate from her husband. She is an amazing candidate, but understandably Bernie Sanders is taking up all the leftist oxygen for now. Right now she's playing it cool--as she should .

Reply to this comment

author avatar L. R. Laverde-Hansen
13th Jul 2015 (#)

Also Rendell a great choice! I liked him as a Governor of Pennsylvania. Smart, capable and straight talker.

Reply to this comment

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password