"Because men do not act in good faith, a wise prince is not bound to keep faith with them.  However it is best for a prince to appear to possess the qualities of mercy, faith, integrity, humanity, and religion."

Machiavelli's paradigm of princehood was Prince Cesare Borgia.  Praising Borgia's killing and despoiling of as many lords and lands as he could lay hands on, he calls him, "An almost perfect archetype of bold rule - I canfind nothing with which to reproach him."

Let's go back to the beginning.  While she was still in college, Hillary
had already set enormous goals for herself.  She saw herself as one gifted and called to accomplish great good for the world.  As she looked out over her anticipated life span, the highest political position she could foresee was Mrs. President of the United States.

The idea of a woman president was simply not going to happen.  So she set out to find a man whom she could make President.  Enter William J. Clinton, tall, handsome, bright, and pliable.  He did have this one flaw; he was [is?] really fascinated by the pretty girls.  No matter.  What he does in his private life is no concern as long as it doesn't get in the way of Hillary's goal.

Notice also how many situations in which the Clintons have been involved that can only be described as close to the edge of the legal cliff.  Yet they have never gone over.  Always someone else takes the hit, and there is never a trail of evidence leading back to the Clintons.

So, going back to early 1999, why was Hillary angry?  Because with Monica there was a trail. Incontrovertible evidence.  I don't even want to imagine the conversation that followed the stain incident.

But, would she leave him?  Absolutely not. Not while he is still President. And she would not allow him to resign or be driven from office either. She has worked overtime  devising plans for every contingency.  Remember, she cannot be First Lady unless WJC is President.

About a year ago I made a modest prediction. I began to watch for events that might lead up to an attention-grabbing event in early 2000.  This
would mark the late stages of her career as Mrs. President.  It is worth noting that times have changed, drastically.  It is no longer outrageous to think of a woman President.

So, could we be looking forward to a scene like this?  Here is Mrs. Clinton staging an event that commands worldwide media attention, and with all the cameras focused and rolling, she makes this two-fold announcement:

First, "I have put up with this and this man as long as I can.  I cannot take it any more.  His lying, his other women, his cheating, and all the rest.  I am leaving Bill Clinton.  Chelsea and I are moving out of the
White House to [..............].

Second, "In response to the huge number of requests, I would be willing to allow the Democratic Party to place my name in nomination for President of the United States.  The press release being distributed will answer most of your questions.  Thank you."

Now, the dilemma for this prospect; where does the office of U.S. Senator from New York fit into this scenario?  I am not sure.  Perhaps my timetable is off by one or two election cycles.   Perhaps she needs to demonstrate her ability to garner public support in the form of votes.  In our national history nearly all Presidents have had a track record of electability, with notable exceptions such as victorious military generals and college presidents.

Suspicious people will notice that, despite all the posturing, real estate purchasing, rhetoric, and "listening" in New York, Mrs. C. has somehow not yet actually said she is a candidate there.  Also, there is something hauntingly familiar about the gradual unraveling of Al Gore's massive lead for the presidential nomination.  No accusations - just some questions.

We will keep watching.

Home | About Us | Archives | Forums | Links | Resources | Submissions | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer