At The Financial Times: Edward Luce on Mrs. Clinton’s Exceptionalism, a comment by Political Reporter

As per usual it won’t take long before this comments section is closed to any further replies, Mrs. Clinton has far too many enemies: when the going gets tough the Financial Times folds, to paraphrase that American Philosopher Vince Lombardi.

Here is what I see for President Hillary Clinton after her less than impressive win over Trump, all those ‘spoiler’ 3rd Party candidates, sapping the strength of her slim victory. Some American Myths never die, like the ‘political spoiler’ that reared its ugly head in 1992 with Ross Perot and was succeeded in 2000 by Ralph Nader. These ‘spoilers’ had the irritating habit of being politically right, but only in retrospect!

Mrs. Clinton and her Sec. of State Victoria Nuland, a more bellicose duo of militarily inexperienced jingos one can hardly recall, except for Kristol and a number of Neo-Conservative Policy Experts.The Clinton/Nuland duo will exploit the South China Sea and Ukraine hot spots, with a kind of manic glee, until they go head to head with an utterly ruthless Putin. Or will the fake crisis begin on the Polish border with Russia? One can only guess that it will end badly i.e. how many lives lost, for what? With Ms. Nuland, and her porcine Spartan husband Robert Kagan, resorting to the unthinkable first use of tactical nuclear weapons?

Another burning question of a possible Clinton victory in 2016: when the President invites Zionist Caudillo Netanyahu to the White House will there be wholesale chaos in the streets of Washington D.C.? All my speculations fitting quite easily into Mr. Luce’s bracing melodramatic framing of the pressing issue of Obama’s Foreign Policy passivity as opposed to Hillary’s bellicosity argued as American Exceptionalism. If my comment seems a bit muddled, here at its end , it simply reflects Mr. Luce’s habit of trying to balance antitheticals and not quite succeeding.

Political Reporter


About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.