Like a bad moon rising, a Clinton revival takes shape now as Hillary Rodham Clinton, presumed front runner among Democrats, casts her eyes on the prize she has chased with every fiber of her being for so long–a chance to be elected the first female President of the United States.
In moves that would earn any Republican the kind of chastising late-night television heaps reflexively upon targets for scorn, Hillary Clinton apparently believes she can build her network of potential supporters by empathizing with them over inequality of income, within a country that has long been the richest nation on earth.
Gracing her anointed audience on the West Coast with the unique benefit of her presence, Clinton recently pulled in a mere pittance for America’s first public sector multi-millionaire ($300,000 for a platitude-laced speech of about one hour) pondering how best to resuscitate what remains of this country’s vaunted middle class.
She should spend more time outside rarefied air, reading reports all taxpayers pay for, such as the Consumer Expenditure Survey, published by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Information for 2012 and 2013, the most recent data available, paints a grim picture for America under “progressive” government that knows no bounds.
Overall, pre-tax household income declined 1.8 percent from $8.162 trillion in 2012 to $8.016 trillion in 2013, despite massive and ongoing deficit-financed Federal spending and artificially suppressed borrowing rates–conditions that academic experts once assured all of us would energize the still-stumbling economy.
“Unexpectedly,” suffering has spared no one in the American heartland.
Pre-tax incomes in the elite group of households that earned $150,000 in a full year–just 7 percent of all households–on average dropped 5.2 percent from $251,270 in 2012 to $238,245 in 2013. Because the number of earners in this group rose from 2.0 to 2.2 per household, the decline in income per earner was a steeper 13.8 percent–from $125,635 in 2012 to $108,293 in 2013.
For the balance of American households–an overwhelming majority of 93 percent–the outcome was also unsatisfactory. Per household, pre-tax income declined 2.3 percent, from $50,823 in 2012 to $49,613. Per earner, pre-tax income dropped 1.0 percent from $40,853 to $40,438.
Most Americans understand economic reality outside the bubbles in which elites swirl; this country already has way too much debt that would become even harder to repay when interest rates inevitably rise and wages stagnate or fall farther.
In this country, wages and jobs are more vulnerable than ever because there is a widening global labor glut and because machines and software are increasingly replacing humans in many workplaces.
Therefore, no American will be protected by even more intrusion from elitist policy wonks, who hop with assistance from one sweet-smelling lily pad to the next, while the rest of us remain mired in the odiferous bog of their making.
Before dealing with omnipresent scandals, connecting with what remains of the middle class will be a depressing experience for Mrs. Clinton; it will mean using a driver’s license yourself, owning fewer than two mansions, and refusing to operate slush funds through which cash potentially passes in exchange for influence.
Then, there is the Gordian knot of problems arising from Clinton proclivities to embrace conflicts-of-interest whose full scope is only now starting to get investigated with fresh eyes.
Serving the wrong masters?
Latest revelations in The Washington Post concerning the intersection of interests among Bill and Hillary Clinton, foreign governments, and multinational corporations shine bright lights on cancerous tumors lodged within the heart of the American Republic.
It is an old game many happily play: a modest set of financial “contributions” buys enormous amounts of real and perceived influence, especially when some foreign nationals, who are accustomed to outright bribery, get involved.
The sad truth in modern America (in both the established political parties) is that a small group of visible elected officials and an even smaller group of special advisers wield enormous influence over decisions that can make individuals even richer, or humble them and bring them down.
This is why many “folks” part with sums that seem gargantuan to the bottom 93% of American households, but are mere trifles for foreign potentates and domestic plutocrats.
Out of all the potential presidents available, do we really want to get back into bed with the perennial candidate and with the organization and people behind Hillary Clinton, so ably described last year by Daniel Halper in Clinton, Inc.?
Since Inauguration Day 2009, America has suffered mightily as one historic President, whose qualifications and inclinations were not vetted remotely enough, strangles the private sector and sinks this country’s foreign standing.
Few of us can afford another experiment which allows avaricious, unscrupulous statists to tighten a regulatory straightjacket upon our beleaguered, indebted, and bowed backs.
So here is some unsolicited advice for Democrats–unless you are feeling charitable and wish to let someone like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker crush Hillary Clinton worse than Ronald Reagan spanked Jimmy Carter in 1980, don’t fall for the blather and the pantsuits.
Encourage Hillary Clinton to live out her years doing good works on her own dime; like it or not, that is her future, and an easy choice.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.