We have a proverb in Italy: never sell the bearskin before you killed the bear

[fpb]

And the bear that Senator Obama has not yet killed is a particularly ferocious eight-footed beast with a joint century of experience in politcs and the law, and that fights only to win. Anyone who underrates the Clintons does so at their own peril. Senator Obama did himself no favours at all by talking as if he had legally won the Democratic primary last night; he has not. He should remember the good old American saying "It ain't over till the fat lady sings"; and between now and the convention, apart from the time they have already spent on it, a thin lady and her tall husband will spend every waking moment of their lives going down the list of every single delegate, looking for anyone whom they can convince, cajole, coherce, threaten or swindle or bribe into voting for them. I do not mean only independent super-delegates, or even those elected in the interest of lesser candidates in the early stages of the election; the Obama camp had better look to its own supporters. Every one of them. Because if there are any representatives anywhere who can in any way be turned, the Clintons will sniff them out and turn them.

The media have consistently undermined the sheer determination of the Clintons to win by any means necessary. One has to understand that this is a man who clawed his way from a southern poor-white background to a Rhodes Scholarship and an internship with the legendary Senator Fulbright, who was a governor in the state of his birth in his forties and President in his fifties. One does not get there by being a nice guy; not even by being corrupt. One has to be the kind of person, luckily rare, who wakes up every morning thinking "what can I do today that will get me closer to being President?" And Hillary is, in this, his absolute soul-mate. The fact that she was sacked from the Nixon investigation as a young woman, for proposing means to hobble the defence that were absolutely illegal, has been widely bruited about the conservative media. But they have not drawn the most serious conclusion: that this is a woman who will do absolutely anything to win a case, especially if she believes she is right. Tricky Dicky was such an obvious target that the idea that he had rights same as any other citizen did not even begin to enter her head. Women in general are much more ruthless than men once they have identified an enemy (something to which I bear personal witness); they do not believe in rules, in holding back, or in leaving anyone any space for personal dignity even in defeat. And then there is the experience of an American law school. Again, this is something I have met in person - in my several encounters with heidi8: they form a mentality, incomprehensible to sane mankind, whereby to get a decision in any kind of court or forum, by whatever means, and for whatever reason, so long as it is not incompatible with written rules, is exactly the same as to get the most crushing moral victory. They genuinely see no difference between moral righteousness and victory. And Hillary and Bill are both American lawyers, Hillary even more so than Bill.

Senator Obama has done his country no good at all by his premature claim of victory. He probably could not have held back his supporters anyway; their desire to see him elected goes beyond the merely political into the world of profound psychological personal motivation. But by encouraging them to believe that that consummation devoutly to be wished was already there, he has laid the basis for a terrible explosion if anything goes wrong. However much he may have tried to move to the centre, there are some pretty scary characters among his supporters. And if they come to feel that they have been cheated - and feeling will be enough, whatever the facts are - they will make Denver 08 worse than Chicago 68. I would not exclude the possibility of a party split of the kind that took place among the Republicans in 1912; and at any rate the nation would go to the polls in the most poisonous atmosphere it has seen in a century or more.

(By the way, the saying I started with is attached to a very nice Aesop-type fable. In the mountains of Italy, bears can still be found, and once upon a time it was a title of honour for a huntsman to kill one. So it happened that two friends decided to go and look for one. They were both experienced huntsmen, and so confident that they were already talking about what they would do with the money for the bearskin that they were sure to get.

THEN THEY HEARD A ROAR! The bear they were after had completely got the drop on them. One of the friends, scared out of his wits, ran for the nearest high tree and climbed it till he was beyond reach - leaving his gun behind. The other man ran, fell, tumbled into a dell, and lay there, hoping that he bear would think him dead and leave him alone. The bear came down till he could touch him; hung around a bit; gave him one or two good sniffs; and then left.

When the bear had finally gone away, the first man came down from his tree, picked up his rifle, and made his way down to the second. Feeling rather witty, he asked him: "Well, what did the bear have to tell you that was so important?" For the bear had been sniffing at his head.

"Very important things indeed," answered the second huntsman bitterly. "First, never to trust in friends who run up a tree when you are in danger, and, second, never to sell the bearskin before you've killed the bear.")

Comments

[stigandnasty919.livejournal.com]

The Clintons are also very pragmatic. I wonder could they accept that the office of Vice President is the best they can possibly achieve this time round? Their choice would appear to be between the chance of taking on that role and fighting to become the losing candidate for a shattered Democratic party.

They may, of course, fade gently into the background.....

[fpb.livejournal.com]

A better hypothesis would have Hillary Clinton being sent to the Supreme Court. The Vice-Presidency has almost no power, but a SCOTUS judge is a creature of might.

[stigandnasty919.livejournal.com]

Yes, that would give Hilary more power. Would Obama want her in suchj a powerful position, I wonder?

[fpb.livejournal.com]

And out of his way. I am only half joking when I say that if she were Veep, Obama would have to employ a food taster. But the point is that she has to be offered something worth accepting.

[bdunbar.livejournal.com]

The Supremes wield enormous power - but they're out of the Executive branch.

It might enough for Mr. Obama.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

You don't think that would be immediately filibustered?

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Republicans rarely filibuster. It was Ted Kennedy who started the modern tradition of assaulting undesirable SCOTUS candidates; by contrast, look what a shower the Republicans let through with barely a nod! And even if they meant to, the next Congress looks likely to be dominated by the Democrats, and with a Democrat president the nominations would only go one way. As a top lawyer and leading senator with a great deal of informal experience of government, the lady is well enough qualified; the only objection the Republicans could raise would be in the matter of character and political views - the former irrelevant to anyone who does not in fact hate the Clintons, and the latter a positive advantage in Democratic eyes.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

Actually, Republicans filibustered plenty during Clinton's second term—holding up the nominations of some of his judges (Richard Paez) for up to four years.

[bdunbar.livejournal.com]

The proverb I heard growing up in Oklahoma was "Don't count your chickens before they hatch."

Not a lot of bears in Oklahoma ..

[lametiger.livejournal.com]

There is also a fable that goes with the common English/American saying. It can be found at:
http://www.trivia-library.com/b/origins-of-sayings-dont-count-your-chickens-before-they-hatch.htm

[bdunbar.livejournal.com]

I learned something today! Thanks.

[dustthouart.livejournal.com]

I call shenanigans. An Aesop fable starring... Patty the farmer's daughter? Patty?
I've heard the story before, but never attributed to Aesop! Did they have milkmaids in ancient Greece, and women going to market by themselves?

[lametiger.livejournal.com]

My reaction was somewhat similar when I saw that webpage was calling it an Aesop's Fable. However, I know that there are several different dynamics going on with these kinds of fables.
1. For some people "Aesop's" became a sort of generic term for the style of story, and not just in our modern days. Earlier centuries could be equally cavalier in sourcing and naming morality tales. Thus later fables have gotten incorporated into the collections over the centuries.
2. It is always possible for tales that actually originated in Ancient Greece to have picked up embellishments in the retelling.
I would have to do some research that I don't have time for in order to pin down which is the case here. Regardless, I have known as long as I can remember that the expression went with this story.

[lametiger.livejournal.com]

I'm waiting anxiously to see how this whole thing plays out. Regardless of what is decided at the conventions or by Hilary Clinton in the time leading up to the convention, we have five LOOONG months left till the general election.

From a Conservative viewpoint, the best thing that could happen would be for her to pull a "Ralph Nader" and split the Liberal vote. Even if she doesn't do that outright, many of her supporters may end up playing spoiled child. Unfortunately the last few election cycles have shown that you can't be sure of anything ahead of time. And on both ends of the political spectrum I have seen more and more "all or nothing" voters who feel they cannot support a candidate with whom they may have many common interests because those candidates don't measure up to an ideal standard. All of which makes for a political process that is fascinating for a student of human nature but very disconcerting otherwise.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I wuold say that the proper comparison would be not with Ralph Nader, a ginger candidate at best, but with Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose Progressives in 1912, who left the wretched Woodrow Wilson through - a man than whom both Taft and Roosevelt were infinitely better. Because remember that Hillary has pretty much half of the party with her, and territorially it is the larger half. If the party really split along the lines of the two candidates' conquests, Obama would be left with the West Coast and some urban areas.

[lametiger.livejournal.com]

That's assuming that the party actually splits in any major fashion. I don't think very many people truly expect that to happen. I brought up Nader because he is a recent example of a disgruntled Democrat possibly (there is some dispute as to how much effect he actually had the first time, and his effect continues to decrease) drawing votes away from the main player in his former party. Certainly his Greens have not become anything of the order of the Bull Moose Party, and I see your point about her share of the primary votes being much larger than Nader's ever was. As a historian you have a tendency to look further back for your parallels than most of us do.

[thepreciouss.livejournal.com]

Sir, I truly admire your extensive knowledge of seemingly all current events. Especially American politics. It really inspires me to look more critically at the election, instead of just laughing at all of the candidates. :)

Thank you very much. But...

[fpb.livejournal.com]

...what's all this "sir" business? Bad enough that johncwright should have me confused with Dr.Johnson, the latchets of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose; but you and I have known each other for three or four years now, and I do not remember this address before now. Well, if you like it, use it. But it does make me feel the tiniest bit ridiculous.

Re: Thank you very much. But...

[thepreciouss.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I've been reading the Economist too much. :) It seems the only way to respond to an editorial.

Re: Thank you very much. But...

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Are you sure that they would describe the Clintons in quite the terms I used? They seem to me a little too lively for that sort of publication.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

Well, apparently she's conceding on Friday, so it doesn't seem that premature.

[dr-dgo.livejournal.com]

onceding does not mean that she is giving up. She is not expected to release her delegates. True, most of her staff is being let go (no money), but the core of advisers are still there. I can easily see her continuing her campaign by any means possible. Barak Hussein Obama does not want her any where near him and or the succession. The Clinton's are not poor, and I am certain that they retain a lot of information that they acquired through the FBI and other agencies to influence people. And they WILL do it. Sean Hannity seems to think that the Clintons have been stopped. Maybe.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

"Apparently". And how often have we heard "well-founded rumours" of her conceding, so far? I will back my estimate of her and her husband's characters any time against all the rumours in creation, especially in an environment where the media are both in Obama's pocket and very prone to wishful thinking on his behalf.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

It's not just "well-founded rumors"; her campaign says so.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I will believe she has given up when I see HER give up.

[super-pan.livejournal.com]

" Women in general are much more ruthless than men once they have identified an enemy (something to which I bear personal witness); they do not believe in rules, in holding back, or in leaving anyone any space for personal dignity even in defeat. "

I disagree with you here. I believe in rules, in holding back, and in personal dignity even in defeat. And I am someone who is considered by many to be a great big bitch.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I have never seen your bitch side in action, so I'll just take your word for it. But that is both my experience and the male consensus. At any rate, Hillary herself does come under the description, wouldn't you say?

This is what a great poet had to say about it (I do not take it altogether seriously, but I have experienced enough of female ruthlessness in my own life to think it worth remembering):

WHEN the Himalayan peasant meets the he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster, who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends the peasant tooth and nail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When Nag the basking cobra hears the careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and avoid it if he can.
But his mate makes no such motion where she camps beside the trail.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

When the early Jesuit fathers preached to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the vengeance of the squaws.
'Twas the women, not the warriors, turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
For the female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man's timid heart is bursting with the things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him isn't his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husbands, each confirms the other's tale—
The female of the species is more deadly than the male.

Man, a bear in most relations—worm and savage otherwise,—
Man propounds negotiations, Man accepts the compromise.
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.

Fear, or foolishness, impels him, ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger—Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue—to the scandal of The Sex!

But the Woman that God gave him, every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue, armed and engined for the same;
And to serve that single issue, lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be deadlier than the male.

She who faces Death by torture for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity—must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions—not in these her honour dwells—
She the Other Law we live by, is that Law and nothing else.

She can bring no more to living than the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the Mistress of the Mate.
And when Babe and Man are lacking and she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron), her equipment is the same.

She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

Unprovoked and awful charges—even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish—like the Jesuit with the squaw!

So it comes that Man, the coward, when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council, dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience, he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of Abstract Justice—which no woman understands.

And Man knows it! Knows, moreover, that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern—shall enthral but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him, and Her instincts never fail,
That the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male.

[dustthouart.livejournal.com]

Oh Kipling.
I come firmly down on the other side myself, but I do not wish to argue the point just now (I have just taken my entrance exam [a day-long affair] and my head is still spinning).
I think, as a matter of spiritual prudence, that women would do better to reflect upon the failings of their own sex, and men upon their own. The man or woman who can truthfully and appositely sum up the failings of the opposite gender is not one in a million, and in my experience the majority who attempt it injure themselves, sometimes gravely.

[super-pan.livejournal.com]

It's just funny you should say this, because I just had an experience where I thought I was going to exert some female wrath, but I had to control myself. And I am still not sure whether it would have been better to have been as explosive as I felt, or if what I actually did do was better. Sorry, that's all very vague, but it's too close to talk about right now. I may post about it soon, but it's still so raw.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

What I am talking about is not so much single episodes, as a whole way of pursuing certain causes. It is over the long term that I have felt the uncompromosing, unforgiving and relentless nature of a certain kind of female vengeance for imagined slights. I dare say that not all women are like that. But I think I can testify that Kipling was not speaking about air.

[every-bite.livejournal.com]

I'm awfully late to the party in commenting to this one, and obviously things have changed greatly in the past couple of weeks, but thank you for being a sane voice in the midst of Obama-Mania. And no, I'm not being facetious.