What the hell is wrong with the American people? Counting the two terms that Bush senior served as V.P. - if Hillary is elected President - we are guaranteed at least 32 years of a Bush or Clinton in the White House! Is this the country that brought modern democratic principles to the world, or a friggin' aristocracy?
Look, if the Dems end up nominating Hillary, I will (almost) certainly have to vote for her. (Know this, though: I'd prefer Ron Paul over continuing this abhorrent rut we are in.) But let's not candy-coat a poopscicle, okay? She is the pure embodiment of an entrenched politician, albeit a female. Although it may not necessarily be her fault, she will perpetuate the divisiveness preventing us from solving our most serious problems. We really need someone who can, and will, break through this 51/49, Red versus Blue bullshit. And if you think Hillary Clinton is the woMan, you are delusional.
Edwards had plenty of promise...until he built a 30,000 sq. foot home. For a family of 4. The year before running for President. On a "Let's Help the Poor" platform. (Even if you dismiss the hypocrisy, the timing shows a serious lack of good judgement.) Oh, and did I mention that he railed against predatory lending, then went to work for one of the worst perpetraitors of such practices? Or that he went off on the rich for using off-shore accounts to avoid taxes, then did it himself? Or that he voted for "No Child Left Behind," and then spent years bashing Bush for the law. The Iraq debacle and the Patriot Act? He voted for them.
The John McCain of 2000 seemed like a decent man. That dude is gone-daddy-gone.
Of the remaining serious candidates who should be considered, that leaves us with Obama. Entrenched politician? No. (Not yet.) Does he seem to have the ability to unite a nation? Yes...he has the oratory skills, the ideas, the charisma and the ability to think critically. He has the best chance of bringing the nation together in a way we haven't been for a long, long time. His ideas for education, for helping the poor, protecting the environment, and his foreign policies all look promising. (The healthcare issue might have to be tackled in bits and pieces - maybe he is hoping to eat that monster a small piece at a time?)
Anyway, the Hopeful Curmudgeon is officially endorsing Barack Obama. And I am sure that means the world to him!
www.barackobama.com
CM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Dear Mr C.
I find you're points to be most interesting. While I tend to support Hillary right now, I think that she is more than capable of triangulating her position to achieve a 60/40 split from a general appeals standpoint. I do agree that Mr. Edwards is unemployed for a reason. He doesn't stand a chance...it's easy to play as far to the left as possible on every issue if you're not voting on anything. McCain is about as good as dead; his 15 Min of fame is up..kind of said to see someone who refuses to admit defeat. That brings me to Mr. Obama. I'm skeptical at the moment but am willing to listen. I've heard enough banter and would like to see some legislation get pushed hard by him out of the Senate.
Peas
Dear b-rad(ger),
We certainly do appreciate your taking the time to comment. And you speak much truth.
I, too, would like to see Obama push some ballsy piece of legislature in the coming months.
As for Hillary, I will eat the virtual paper this isn't written on if she pulls off a 60/40 win.
That would be impressive.
Thanks and please come again.
CM
CM-
I really think you should give Peas a chance. I am of two minds regarding politicians. On the one hand, the entrenched ones (i.e. Hillary) have had more time to do things and learn things. On the other hand, they are the ones who are guilty of being career politicians. As for the newbies (i.e. Obama), nobody REALLY knows what they're about as they haven't had the time to prove themselves. This puts us in the position of having to guess what they might be about.
Obama looks good to me so far, but it's hard to say where things will go.
One thing that does trouble me with respect to the 32 years bit is that you're elevating Hillary's position in the Clinton White House beyond her role as Mrs. President. It's fairly well established that after the health care debacle of the early 90s, Hillary tucked her tail between her legs and hid under the sofa. Too bad it wasn't the one in the Oval Office or she might have known better than to assume Bill's fidelity.
Ha! Two good ones, jeangenie! (Should have been her under the desk...and Give peas a chance.)
I am not referring to Hillary's influence in particular when lamenting the "32 years of Bush-Clinton." I am mournful and friggin pissed that there is even a possibility that a member of the Bush-Clinton families will have occupied the White House for so long. Maybe I should just concede that we don't actually live in a representative democracy - and be done with it.
Nah...I'm too curmudgeonly to relinquish my idealism.
As always, thanks for sharing your thoughts,
CM
Cranial,
There is one small thing that I would like to point out. So far we have had 20 years of Bush-Clintons in the white house. Even if Hillary wins two terms, that would only total 28.
Now, I am not very good at math, but I know that 28 does not equal 32. Are you counting senior's term as VP? And if so, didn't Cheney establish that the VP is not part of the White house? ;)
And, if Hillary gets elected, that doesn't necessarily equate to 8 years.
:P
L to the T
L to the T:
It's only the smallest of stretches I am making - and I don't think it diminishes my point at all. Bush Sr was Ray Gun's VP. That term started in 1981. If Hill is elected Prez, that will be 2013...32 years. I have to say, though, your point about Cheney hiding behind executive privelege and then trying to claim he wasn't part of the executive when it suited him, that ri-cock-ulously funny!
Peace.
Post a Comment