The final episode of “The Wire” aired Sunday night. Even those who never saw an episode have likely read critics’ raves, with many calling it the most profound examination of urban America ever depicted on television. The essential message of “The Wire” is the suppression of institutional change and reform, whether in schools, the criminal justice system, city politics, or daily newspapers. Americans are raised to believe in progress, but “The Wire” details how and why solutions to the problems of urban America are continually blocked by powerful institutional interests working in concert with the demands of patronage and ambition. Even politicians that initially want to change the cycle of failed policies--like the show’s Mayor Tommy Carcettti--ultimately sacrifice this agenda and put their personal ambitions first. In vividly describing how politicians use the rhetoric of “change” and “reform” to recycle old personnel and failed policies, “The Wire’s” Carcetti has become the perfect metaphor for Hillary Clinton’s political career, and her 2008 presidential race.

What separates “The Wire” from virtually every other television drama in history is that it does not simply offer a vivid portrait of urban America’s ongoing problems; it also explains the root causes and assigns culpability. And the “villains” are not stereotypical “evil” developers or “corrupt” mayors, but rather the institutional forces that lead even idealistic young politicians to sacrifice their ideals for what they rationalize is a future, greater good.

In “The Wire’s” early seasons, Tommy Carcetti is portrayed as an idealistic Baltimore ward politician interested in changing the system to reduce crime and increase employment in the working-class community he represents. Carcetti’s main adversary is a Willie-Brown style incumbent mayor who embodies the status quo and drives the city’s patronage-driven political machine.

Believing that his ambitions are limited as a white politician among a black-dominated Baltimore Democratic Party electorate, Carcetti nevertheless seizes upon rising crime and corruption at City Hall to challenge the mayor’s attempt for a third term. His populist appeal and pledge to change “business as usual” at City Hall wins him surprisingly broad support, and he wins an upset victory and a mandate for “change.”

But even before election day, the creators of “The Wire” give a glimpse into Carcetti’s future. After showing him incredibly impressed by a novel drug-fighting strategy has greatly reduced crime in the city’s working-class African-American neighborhoods, Carcetti publicly attacks the plan---and the mayoral administration that spawned it---to score political points.

The media, also unconcerned that the challenged plan has made life dramatically more livable for the city’s low-income residents, bolsters Carcetti’s attack on the program. The result: Carcetti looks good, the mayor looks bad, and drug dealing returns with a vengeance to the city’s working-class communities.

Carcetti rationalizes his betrayal of the officer who initiated the new anti-drug dealing policy by arguing that supporting the plan would kill his mayoral campaign, but that once in office he would have the clout to implement creative approaches. Season five, however, shows how Carcetti breaks his promises to reform the police department, change the city’s failed approach to drug dealing, and to bring a “new day” to the city’s revolving door criminal justice system.

Carcetti is consistently portrayed as someone who really wants to change a failed system, but who is prevented from doing so by a combination of circumstances beyond his control (an inherited budget deficit) and personal ambition (his desire to run for Governor). Whenever he is forced to choose between expedience and principle he chooses the former---while simultaneously insisting to himself and others that once he gets more power, he will really be free to become a force for good.

From what I have read about Hillary Clinton’s political development, it seems a lot like that of Tommy Carcetti. Idealistic in her early days, she aligned herself with corporate interests like WalMart in the belief that it would advance her influence and her husband’s political career.

Bill and Hillary always speak about addressing social and economic injustice, but like Tommy Carcetti, circumstances and ambition keep getting in the way.

When the Clinton Administration abandoned its 1992 “Putting People First” public investment plan, the “inside” story was not that Bill and Hillary had sacrificed their principles. Rather, it was that only upon taking office did they realize that the Federal Reserve had more power over the economy than the President.

From the betrayal of Lani Guinier, to the destruction of federal Legal Services, to the Clinton’s all-out push for NAFTA, Clinton’s first term undermined progressive interests while claiming to serve them. After Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in 1994 elections, the Clinton Administration found it could rationalize any policy on the grounds that it was better than that offered by right-wing Republicans.

The culmination of this pattern of sacrificing principles for the alleged greater good was the President’s signing of a welfare “reform” bill in August 1996. This was a measure that he previously agreed to veto, a bill Hillary privately championed despite public opposition from her alleged mentor, Children Defense Fund founder Marian Wright Edelman.

How did Clinton backers justify this action? The same way Tommy Carcetti justified cutting deals with corrupt politicians and rejecting police department reform----signing welfare reform was said to be “necessary” to ensure Clinton’s re-election, just as Carcetti’s actions greased his campaign for Maryland Governor.

In the worlds of both the Clintons and “The Wire,” progressive reform always takes a backseat to future election needs. And politicians and their supporters justify such expedience as a means to a greater good.

So if you wonder why Hillary Clinton has no scuples when attacking Barack Obama, it is because she believes---like Tommy Carcetti--- that getting elected to higher office is the greatest good. And both Clinton and Carcetti are effective in their public presentations because they truly believe inside themselves that they will bring this greater good, their political histories notwithstanding.

Had David Simon not ended “The Wire” after five seasons, his brief showing of Carcetti’s election as Maryland Governor would likely have been followed by Carcetti cutting more deals and putting off promised reforms while he carved out an image for a US Senate or Presidential run. For the Carcetti’s and Clinton’s of the world, the race to get ahead never ends, regardless of how many broken promises and shattered lives are left behind.