What a sense of entitlement - "It's my turn"

[Demeter]

42. She didn't have to--her flunkies and running dogs did

Fmr Obama Campaign Manager: It's Hillary's 'Turn' to Be President

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/fmr-obama-campaign-manager-its-hillarys-turn_836452.html

Feb 2, 2015--President Obama's former campaign manager, Jim Messina, said today that it was Hillary Clinton's "turn" to be the next president of the United States:

"We want Hillary Clinton to be the next president of the United States," Messina told an MSNBC host. "It's her turn and her time. I think she would be the right leader for this country moving forward. We're going to do whatever it takes to make sure she's the president of the United States."

‘It’s Never Anyone’s Turn to Be President’

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/it-s-never-anyone-s-turn-be-president_978588.html

The Scrapbook’s faith in the younger generation has just spiked upwards. A reader emails us an editorial from the Zephyr, student paper of the Brearley School, the very liberal prep school on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. A tip of The Scrapbook’s homburg to author and editor in chief Claire Kozak for the cogently argued and gracefully written piece, which we reproduce here:

I am, without question, a feminist. I have attended an all-girls school for nearly ten years, and I have had the remarkable opportunity to grow up in an environment that is dedicated to educating and empowering women. I believe that we should have a woman president. But when that day comes, I want that woman to be elected -because of her accomplishments. Not her gender.

However, Hillary Clinton’s popularity seems to be based on her identity as a woman. Since she announced her candidacy in a video where she claimed to be the voice of the “everyday American,” she has answered very few questions on substantial issues. She’s spoken about a small number of key issues including campaign reform and immigration—topics where her opinion will be popular among the Democratic community. But mainly, her selling point is speaking for the American people. This might be a noble cause, but it is a campaign strategy that doesn’t tell us much about her plans. And yet, she continues an unusually smooth and silent glide towards the White House. In early February, President Obama’s former campaign manager Jim Messina voiced the phrase that many have now made their own, “It’s Hillary’s Turn.”

This phrase has a complicated history. In past years, it has actually referred to the political tradition of the vice president or vice presidential candidate becoming the party’s nominee. However, the phrase has been appropriated by many of Hillary’s fans to signify her rightful claim to the oval office because it’s time for a woman president.

But the fact is, it’s never anyone’s turn to be president. The presidency is one of the most complex and demanding positions in the world, and when someone is chosen to lead the United States of America, it should be because they are the most qualified person for the job. Gender, race, socio-economic status, or religion should not factor into a presidential election.

Margaret Thatcher did not become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom because of her gender. She earned the votes of the British people with the clarity of her positions. She made it very clear what her policies were, and she won that office three times. Benazir Bhutto did not serve two terms as the Prime Minister of Pakistan because she was a woman—she led her country because voters thought she was the most equipped person to do so at the time. Golda Meir was elected as the fourth Prime Minister of Israel because of her politics and previous experience as the Minister of International Affairs. All of these women leaders were highly qualified and clear in their positions.

If anyone “deserves” to be president, it should be because of his or her policies, promises, plans for the country, and political record. It shouldn’t be because the government needs to diversify. Feminism and gender equality are relevant and highly important issues, without a doubt. But we cannot elect a woman president just because it is time for a woman to be president.

And when we do elect a female president, it should be because she is the most qualified person for the job, because she has won the hearts and minds of the American people with her promises and positions on national and international issues. As of now, Mrs. Clinton has barely campaigned. She has steered clear of major issues like America’s war on terror or her plans for the conflict in the Middle East, focusing instead on the feel-good notion of representing Americans. She has spoken only on issues of little substance, and has avoided controversial and personal topics that need to be addressed.

So, Mrs. Clinton, start answering questions. Start telling us your policies, instead of making general statements about how you want to be the voice of the American people. Show us why you are the most qualified person for the job. Once you can do that, you might get my vote. But you need to earn it, first.

Hillary's Turn: Inside Her Improbable, Victorious Senate Campaign

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5131QS8FW5L._SX317_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Hillarys-Turn-Improbable-Victorious-Campaign/dp/0684873028

Hillary’s Turn by James Mann

Every secretary of state, we’re told, is going to be different from those who came before, but traditional demands inevitably take precedence...New secretaries of state always seek to portray their tenure as a bold departure from the immediate past. The secretary’s staff and the State Department press corps both have an interest in creating a striking image for the new occupant of our nation’s most prestigious Cabinet position. The secretary’s aides are eager to attract attention and positive coverage for their boss. The reporters must deal with editors, producers, and audiences interested in novelty. Yet both parties face a hurdle: The job of secretary of state is, by its very nature, one whose daily staples are diplomacy, bureaucracy, and (usually) continuity. Novelty, in other words, can be hard to come by. Given this problem, one standard approach has been to emphasize how different the secretary is from his or her predecessor.

Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton’s secretary of state, established herself not merely as the first woman to be secretary of state but as someone blunter and more colorful than her predecessor, the gray, ever-circumspect Warren Christopher. After Colin Powell replaced Albright, his supporters boosted his image by pointing to his broader knowledge of military and security affairs: He already had served as both national security adviser and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. After Powell, who discovered that the key decisions on war with Iraq seemed to be made in his absence, it was said of Condoleezza Rice that it was nice to have a secretary of state who enjoyed a close relationship with the President.

Enter Hillary Clinton. Over the past decades, many politicians have run the Pentagon, most of them former members of Congress (Mel Laird, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Les Aspin, Bill Cohen, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel)—no doubt because one of the principal tasks for any secretary of defense is to win congressional approval of the defense budget. Politicians have run the CIA as well: George H.W. Bush, Porter Goss, Panetta. But in 2009 Clinton became the first elected politician in nearly three decades to serve as secretary of state (and the last two before her, Ed Muskie in the Carter Administration and Christian Herter in the Eisenhower years, were only replacement secretaries who filled in at the tail end of their Administrations).

Clinton wasn’t close to the President. When she started the job, she had little experience in diplomacy. Almost inevitably, Clinton, her staff, and the reporters covering her turned her profile as politician into the defining feature of her role as secretary of state. As she crisscrossed the globe, Clinton hosted town meetings, met with civic groups, gave speeches, held press conferences, and sat for interview after interview. In truth, some of her predecessors had undertaken such activities, too; the concept of public diplomacy has taken on ever-greater importance in foreign policy over the past two decades. But it’s fair to say that none of her predecessors did as many public events as Clinton.

After all the sound and fury, what should we make of Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state? How much difference did all of her globe-trotting and public events make for American foreign policy? What did she accomplish in concrete terms?

Kim Ghattas’s new book, The Secretary: A Journey with Hillary Clinton from Beirut to the Heart of American Power, presents itself as an effort to answer these questions: MORE


The Secretary: A Journey With Hillary Clinton From Beirut to the Heart of American Power By Kim Ghattas • Times Books • 2013 • 368 pages • $27