US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Commentary :: DNC : International : Politics : War and Militarism
Does Hillary INTEND to be John McCain's running mate?
07 Mar 2008
Modified: 07:59:12 PM
Based on her own words, it sounds like pro-neocon "Democrat" Hillary Clinton expects to share the White House with pro-neocon "Republican" John McCain. Could this be what some pro-neocon elites actually want?

If Hillary Clinton can be taken at her words (and if those words are quoted correctly, which many websites are not doing), it sounds like Clinton expects to share the White House with John McCain.

On March 3, Clinton told reporters "I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2002." [1]

She didn't say McCain "would, if elected" bring his lifetime of experience to the White House. She said "will."

Maybe this was just a mistake.

Or maybe she really wants and intends to be McCain's Vice President and that's why she's apparently working so hard to destroy her fellow Democrat, Barack Obama. Maybe this is also the goal of McCain and the militaristic, neocon-friendly elites who support both Clinton and McCain.


After all, both the Clinton and McCain campaigns are intimately tied to a single, elite public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller (B-M).

As DailyKos reported on February 24, "Clinton's chief strategist [Mark Penn] [is] not only her campaign's leading advocate for these attacks [on Obama]--but [is] also the CEO of a public affairs firm whose DC-based lobbying subsidiary was headed up by John McCain's top adviser [Charlie Black]." [2]

B-M's client list includes or has included Saudi Arabia, oil-rich Colombia, and even "military contractor" Blackwater. [3]

According to Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber's mid-2003 book "Weapons of Mass Deception" (on page 108): "The Saudi monarchy...turned to public relations firms for assistance following September 11. Three days after the 9/11 attacks, the PR giant Burson-Marsteller signed an agreement to provide 'issues counseling and crisis management' for the Kingdom and to place ads in the New York Times expressing Saudi support for the U.S. in its time of crisis."

The DailyKos article points out that several of the smear attacks on Obama have been waged by both Clinton and McCain, virtually simultaneously.


In his February 27 article " Why the War on Obama," Robert Parry writes:

"While some cynics still view Barack Obama’s appeal for 'change' as empty rhetoric, it’s starting to dawn on Washington insiders that his ability to raise vast sums of money from nearly one million mostly small donors could shake the grip that special-interest money has long held over the U.S. government.

...Right now, the front line for the Washington Establishment is Hillary Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, which has been stunned by Obama’s political skills as well as his extraordinary ability to raise money over the Internet. Obama’s grassroots donations have negated Clinton’s prodigious fundraising advantage with big donors.

Powerful lobbies – from AIPAC to representatives of military and other industries – also are recognizing the value of keeping their dominance over campaign cash from getting diluted by Obama’s deep reservoir of small donors. It’s in their direct interest to dent Obama’s momentum and demoralize his rank-and-file supporters as soon as possible.

So, neoconservatives and other ideological movements – heavily dependent on grants from the same special interests – are now joining with the Clinton campaign to tear down Obama by depicting him as unpatriotic, un-vetted, possibly a 'closet Muslim.'" [4]

(It's worth remembering that in the Obama speech that Clinton keeps mentioning (Obama's October, 2002 speech to an antiwar rally), Obama made it clear that he rejects the neocon ideology.[5] It's also worth remembering that Clinton has received financial support from at least two sources very close to the American neocon realm; Lockheed Martin, and Rupert Murdoch.)


Many key neocons wanted McCain--not George W. Bush--to become President in 2000. (Google "Kristol McCain Kosovo" to learn more.)

As a co-founder of the neocons' Project For The New American Century, Jeb Bush may be dear to the hearts of at least some neocons. And pro-neocon Joe Lieberman seems to pop up right behind John McCain almost anytime McCain appears on stage. You'd think that McCain would prefer Lieberman or Bush as his running mate.

But maybe Lieberman is too obviously neocon. And maybe Jeb Bush is too obviously a Bush.

Maybe pro-neocon elites see Hillary as a stealthier choice to serve as McCain's VP. And for the stealth-loving neocons, maybe that makes her their best choice.


Maybe Clinton's attacks on Obama are also tied to an almost blind ambition on Clinton's part. Maybe Clinton is so intent on reoccupying the White House that she's incapable of caring how much she may damage a fellow Democrat, insult his supporters, or demoralize her party.

Psychoanalyst Karen Horney has written about the "neurotic search for glory," in which a person tries to live up to an unrealistic, idealized sense of who they actually are. While self-idealization is at the core of the neurotic search for glory, three other elements are always present: the need for perfection, neurotic ambition ("the compulsive drive toward superiority"), and the drive toward a vindictive triumph. [6]

We've glimpsed Clinton's need for perfection. We've heard her tone of superiority. What we're seeing most recently certainly seems vindictive.


[1] Text is at

Video is at






This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


A minor correction, with apologies
08 Mar 2008
I made a mistake in adapting the DailyKos quote (Reference [2] above). McCain's top adviser STILL IS the head of Burson-Marsteller's DC-based lobbying subsidiary.

Here's how my adapted DailyKos quote should have been worded:

"Clinton's chief strategist [Mark Penn] [is] not only her campaign's leading advocate for these attacks [on Obama]--but [is] also the CEO of a public affairs firm whose DC-based lobbying subsidiary [is] headed up by John McCain's top adviser [Charlie Black]."