Hillary Clinton testifies at congressional Benghazi hearing, winning the day as Republican commit- tee members unwittingly make her appear to be a sympathetic victim by badgering her unmercifully.

HOUSE COMMITTEE’S RIGHT-WING ZEALOTS
TRANSFORM IMAGE OF UNTRUSTWORTHY
CANDIDATE INTO SYMPATHETIC VICTIM

A field day for whistle-blower Nader?

By David Maril

While wondering if it would be worth it for Elijah Cummings to give up his voice, seniority and influence in the House if he does decide to run for Barbara Mikulski’s seat in the U.S. Senate, it’s interesting to note the following:

 You have to give the Republicans on the Benghazi investigative committee credit for doing what many of us thought was impossible: They transformed Hillary Clinton into a sympathetic figure and made her seem human.

The nine-plus hours they badgered away, focused more on assassinating her character rather than uncovering hidden details behind the causes of the tragedy which resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Officer Sean Smith and two CIA contractors.

While Clinton maintained her composure, the Republicans on the panel shifted into an unmerciful, disrespectful mode, stripping them of any remaining credibility that they were conducting an objective, fact-finding mission.

You can be sure, thanks to the hearing, that a segment of Democrats and independents who were not inspired by Clinton’s tiresome combination of flip-flopping, mixed in with her “same old song and dance” style, did some flip-flopping of their own.

Although they had initially wanted a fresher, more idealistic and trustworthy candidate, the Republican lynch mob provided a reason for them to rally around the veteran politician.

DISCOVERING AN INCENTIVE TO VOTE FOR CLINTON

By displaying such a heavy-handed prosecutorial style, the interrogators pushed undecided voters into discovering an incentive to vote for Clinton and make the Republicans pay in the presidential election.

 One scenario that has been overlooked in all of the presidential campaign coverage is that the outcome of the race for the GOP nomination will probably remain undecided going through the early convention voting rounds.

Unless the current trends change and one of the more traditional politician-candidates regains enough traction to build a convincing lead, the delegate count will likely be so divided, nobody will have enough support to capture the nomination.

If the deadlock appears to be a stalemate, with Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio refusing to yield, the only solution may be a compromise candidate being drafted by the Party to come in from outside and take the nomination.

One can only wonder whether Mitt Romney, the GOP standard bearer in the 2012 election, is sitting back, thinking about these very possibilities for himself.

 On the Democrats’ side, Joe Biden made a wise decision not to challenge Hillary Clinton, thus avoiding a punishing campaign that would have been difficult for him to win.

Now he, like Romney, can stay above the fray, serving as an experienced senior party leader.

IF SANDERS IS ABLE TO REMAIN A TOUGH CHALLENGER

And if Bernie Sanders is able to remain a tough challenger to Clinton, it is possible she may end up with a lead but remain short of enough delegates to win the nomination.

There is always the possibility that Biden could be drafted as the nominee to unify his party.

 One question missing from the single Democratic and two Republican debates is asking each candidate for the specifics of how they would accomplish their goals.

It would be nice to know, for example, Bernie Sanders’ game-plan for dealing with conservative Republican majorities in the House and Senate.

It’s one thing to demonize the “fat cats of Wall Street” and issue promises of spreading the wealth around and reducing unemployment. But how do you get these types of radical economic and social changes done?

And on the other side, how do right-wing Republicans, unwilling to compromise and find common ground, plan to eliminate and shrink social programs, making government smaller?

 Other questions that would be revealing and pertinent relate to the international scene and foreign policy. How about some details from each candidate on dealing with Vladimir Putin, Syria, North Korea, China, Israel, Palestine, Iran and Iraq?

 Since he isn’t running for President, maybe it’s time for consumer watchdog Ralph Nader to come out of retirement and launch a comprehensive scrutinization of car safety.

NADER WOULD HAVE A FIELD DAY

With all of the recalls by major automakers for violations of safety and environmental issues, Nader would have a field day blowing the whistle.

 What took officials in different states around the country so long to start investigating all of these “fantasy league” gaming ventures?

Pure and simple, these fantasy games, which are advertised heavily on televised sports broadcasts, is gambling that produces high revenue.

Seeing a potential for fattening their coffers, the commissioners of all the major sports have shamelessly encouraged fans to jump into this new type of wagering.

The bottom line is, they are sanctimonious about the evil nature of addictive gambling — unless a portion of the revenue comes back into their team owners’ pockets.

 With all of the former players, managers and coaches out there, Fox uses strange judgment in the hiring of its celebrity post-season commentators.

Just when it seemed they couldn’t “bottom” their pick of Pete Rose, banished from baseball for gambling, they went out and signed Alex Rodriguez, the most over-exposed baseball star, whose career has been steeped in steroid controversy.
 
davidmaril@voiceofbaltimore.org
 
“Inside Pitch” is a weekly opinion column written for Voice of Baltimore by David Maril.
 
CHECK OUT LAST WEEK’S “INSIDE PITCH” COLUMN:  click here
…and read archived Dave Maril columns  by clicking here.