I have generally posted on matters about which I believe I can
claim some knowledge and some expertise — health care, the Amarillo City
Council and downtown development. I shy away from some of the national news and
stories. But occasionally something resonates strongly with me and Thomas
Farragher’s article did just that.
I’ve wanted to go “all in” about Hillary Clinton’s
presidential aspirations and, in 2008, was inclined to back her until Barack
Obama came along with a more populist message. Now, however, I see both of them
as different sides of the same coin — corporate captives who have long
abandoned the middle class and the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
Maybe I don’t understand national politics and the concessions politicians must
make to move incrementally to a goal.
What Farragher’s column demonstrates to me is that the Clinton
campaign will be a marketing/sales blitz to paint her as “the people’s” candidate.
I won’t be buying it. As Farragher points out, using the word “inauthenticity,”
Clinton neither can, wants to nor will listen to or understand anyone but those
in the plutocrat class. More’s the pity, because I see a backlash against her
that would open the door to a Republican presidency — and at this point in the United
States’ history — that would be a disaster.
If those in our country want a clear choice, and if the Democratic
Party wants to give us a clear choice, we need a ticket like Warren-Sanders or
the equivalent thereof. It ain’t gonna happen, but I can hope.
