Ivory Tower

***

We have to admit that we’re a bit confused about County Judge Carlos Cascos’ idea to allow workers to come to the office just four days a week so they can safe the cost of gas on the fifth day.

First, we appreciate his concern for the employees, and his creative ways of trying to help them. Whenever his predecessor, Gilberto Hinojosa, wanted to win favor with his crew, he just raised bridge tolls and shared the windfall around the office.

But if he’s thinking about saving gas, Cascos might be looking at the wrong solution.

First of all, we’re not sure the county can get by with a four-day workweek, since they already seem to close county offices to enjoy every holiday on the books. Of course they take July 4, Memorial Day and all the other big days off, but they also shut down on Juneteenth, Texas Independence Day and the like. If somebody decides to create a holiday to celebrate Pecos Bill or somesuch character, you can bet that Cameron County residents will lose one more day of services. Add the holidays to a shorter workweek and these workers might not go to the office often enough to even memorize the best route to work.

When it comes to gas consumption, however, going to work more often could actually be the best way to save money — at least, if county workers are anything like we are.

On our days off we actually burn up the gasoline, running errands and doing chores that have accumulated during the week while we’re stuck in our little tower. Weekends are filled with shopping for groceries, taking things out to get fixed or just going to the Laundromat to clean the bedroom comforters that don’t fit in the home washing machine.

Then there’s the time we take to relax or have a bit of fun. Often that means driving out to visit friends, or heading out to the mall, the movies, a restaurant or whatever.

Even staying home ends up costing more, since opening and closing various doors around the house makes the air-conditioner and fridge work harder, and it’s likely that we’ll be using lights, radios or televisions, etc.

An extra day off is a juicy morsel indeed; we might like to taste such a treat now and again. But if the idea is to safe money on fuel — at least where we tower dwellers are concerned — it’s probably better that we come on in and punch the clock. That would keep us off the streets, out of trouble, and away from the poor house.

***

Hillary Clinton finally proved a good if grudging warrior and conceded defeat to Barack Obama, the majority choice of Democratic Party primary voters.

It must not have been easy.

Clinton’s reluctance to accept defeat (it came four days after Obama clinched the nomination, but long after his nomination was assured, and only after a come-to-Jesus session between the two and party elders), and the obvious angst seen among many of her supporters, suggests a faulty premise that appeared to drive her campaign.

It was a bitter loss for Clinton and her supporters; there was no shortage of television images of people, mostly women, crying as if they’d just lost their only son. Many of them told reporters and pollsters that they’d rather jump parties and vote for John McCain than give any support to the man who beat their beloved Hillary. About a third of Democrats recently polled said they’d prefer that see launch an independent campaign for the White House.

If anything those kinds of reactions only exposed the sense of entitlement that permeates the Democratic Party, especially the one defined by Hillary and Bill Clinton. Remember that some two years ago, when Hillary voiced her intent to run for president, she suggested strongly that others should just forget about challenging her. She went as far as to declare that her capture of the party nomination was “inevitable.”

She boasted heavy campaign coffers, and said she’d already locked up all the big party donors. Obama simply ran around such interference, nickeling and diming his way with small donations raised on the Internet. And by May he was the one with resources to spare, while Clinton was loaning her campaign millions from her own pocket, even though her chances of winning the nomination were long gone.

Even in her speech, Clinton was unable to fully concede, and instead of giving Obama credit she largely blamed the American people for making a mistake. She suggested that many people simply didn’t want to vote for a woman, saying that her campaign had been “for the single mom with a young daughter, juggling work and school,” and indicating that Americans hadn’t yet reached a point where they “understand the struggles of their grandmothers and mothers.”

Not in so many words, she essentially complained that a woman was supposed to make history first, and in that this country had failed her, and itself.

Most of the speech was dedicated to praising herself, not Obama, noting that she had blazed a trail that others could only follow. She said we can all be proud “that from now on it will be unremarkable for a woman to win primary state victories. Unremarkable to have a woman in a close race to be our nominee. Unremarkable to think a woman could be president of the United States.”

Clinton’s success certainly is historic. But her focus cheapens not only the equally historic candidacy of Obama, but also the paths made by the women who went before her.

Much has been made of the fact that Bill Clinton was the first true baby boomer president, exemplifying many of the traits that the demographic group generally shares. Unfortunately, one of those traits is a narcissism that makes it hard for many boomers to admit anything less than superiority.

The fact is that in terms of gender, Clinton’s campaign already was unremarkable. People took her seriously because of who she is, not because she is a woman. Elizabeth Dole was taken just as seriously during her short run for the Republican nomination in 2000. Many people have, quite seriously, suggested other women as possible candidates, including Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Hillary Clinton has many reasons to be proud of her run. She came close, and could well become the nominee in future years. But it must be because she offers programs and ideas that appeal to a majority of the voting public.

In the meantime we hope she comes to accept the reality that most people didn’t really care whether or not she is a woman. The simple fact is that while she had plenty of support, a larger group of voters either decided that they liked Obama’s proposals more. And most of those who specifically voted against her didn’t have any problem with a woman as president, but they did have a problem with Hillary Clinton as president.

Clinton’s sense of entitlement might convince her that America owes her the presidency; we don’t. The truth is that every voter will act in his own interests, not Clinton’s. After all, it’s all about us, too.