The Bill's a Problem Schtick Creates a Bigger Problem

Mika's view of Bill Clinton's lack of enthusiasm in his endorsement of the "One" blindly ignores a point egregious.

Each day, Chuck Todd, Jonathan and al, point out that the civil thing - vetting HRC as the obvious VP option - ain't happening for one very important reason: Bill. The assertion is consistently developed in the logic that Bill is a problem, rival for the alpha, baggage, loose cannon...etc.

Hillary's own qualifications are - only in the Obama Tankers' minds - eclipsed by the focus on the negatives about Bill.

Such a thinly-veiled envy.
Such a mark of the foolish attempt to replace the ranking, actually ACHIEVING Democrat with a wanna-be icon.
Effective political movements take the best of what succeeds, build on it and invent the next great thing. In my experience, that is the concept we know as PROGRESSIVE.

What's more worthy? The page we're on, where Clinton represents Peace & Prosperity, a Brilliant Mind Performing / Providing? Actively engaged, world wide in diplomatic leadership? Or Nostalgia for the glamor that was Camelot? Consistent with the wanna-be icon mentality.

Sure, 'the One' proclaims to the world that he will return us to our diplomatic focus. But how can they even suggest that diplomacy wasn't always and foremost, the Clinton Way? Rennaissance work at every turn to fine tune and integrate diplomatic science into each nuance of both Clintons' interaction with humanity remains the hallmark of their work. Get over yourselves, obambots. Yer flattering yerselves.

Beware of creeps in Progressive guise

Four years in local politics left me pretty confused about what distinguished a progressive from any other political entity. This "progressive" group had organized in my county and drew a good deal of response from folks who couldn't find the democratic party.

I was drawn into the idea of revitalizing the Democratic Party and was ok with their mantra of change. What I didn't realize I was in for is the part that leaves me catatonic.

They're body snatchers.

These people only call themselves democrats because they can't win elections as Progressives. Nobody can really make sense of their objectives. If they can't be in command, they spend all their energies undermining others who exhibit leadership or political abilities.

Sure, they come on all cooperative and full of steam about getting democrats elected. Point proves, however, the only democrats they are interested in electing are themselves!

At meetings, they are petulant and contentious, force issues without building consensus, take a "my way or the highway" approach to negotiations and consider it better to ask forgiveness than permission. Needless to say: unilateral decision making and controlled, scripted meetings are their forte. Like the Obama nation, they are free to take the discourse in whatever direction serves their purpose. Your take on anything is unworthy of consideration. Emails and blogs are weapons by which they foment and disrupt, cyberbully and discredit their political rivals. (You know them as the folks from whom they demand unity.)

They don't want to work on any projects, don't want to serve on committees. They just want to show up at monthly meetings and vote down your ideas, tell you how to spend the money you raise and bash your traditional candidates.

A year later, those ideas you proposed but were rejected are now showing up on THEIR blogs and emails as THEIR ideas!

I used to call these types Republicans. But now I recognize that they are parasites who will make you ill.