Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton came of age in the late 1960s, tumultuous years in American history, when the civil rights and anti-war movements roused many of the country’s young people. Hillary Clinton was one of those people. Speaking at Wellesley College’s 1969 commencement, she said, “[The] challenge now is to practice politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible possible.” She has spent a good deal of the years since trying to do just that.
Has she always lived up to those words? She has not. She has been hardened. She has made uncomfortable compromises. She has said different things to different people at different times. She has been driven by ambition as well as idealism, an ambition now focused on being the first woman president. There is much not to like about her.
But there is much more to admire. She has stayed the course, and she has served our country, far longer and far better than her critics and those who criticize with clean hands. To paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, she is the woman “who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood.”
To treat her as her opponent – a man who has not done a single day of public service in his life, who came out of the 1960s unblemished by idealism – treats her is reprehensible. To suggest that he is more qualified to be president than she is would be laughable were it not so frightening.
Am I for Hillary? You bet I am.