What is it with this large faction of the Democratic Party that are at best blinded by ideology and at worst are complete morons? This is the 3rd election in the row that the Democrats not only can win, but will win...if only they put up a candidate who a) has vision, b) isn't tied to a previous administration, and c) can pull the independents and centrist voters in.
Lo and behold, Hillary Clinton is actually in a position where she gets enough votes to steal the nomination (yes, steal) away from Barack Obama. Looking at the list above, she fails on all three points.
Are you people really that stupid?
Oh, so you think I'm being harsh or perhaps I just simply don’t see the magic or the significance of HRC. Ok, try this on for size: let's forget for a moment that the Republican in this race is John McCain. Let's pretend for a moment that it's Jeb Bush.
Tell me, Democrats, how that very idea turns your stomach. Tell me how determined you are to make sure that he doesn't get within sniffing distance of the White House. Tell me how much money you are willing to contribute to make sure that he loses, even more determined than you are to make sure that whatever Democrat is running wins.
Do you get the idea? Jeb might actually be the best politician and the most centric of the 3 Bushes. It doesn't matter; his name alone is polarizing and renders him unelectable. And yet, there are a large number of you out there who don't seem to understand just how much the name "Clinton" produces venom-laced saliva in this country. And no, they're not all right-wing wacko Republicans. Those of us in the center have absolutely NO desire to see anyone named Bush or Clinton hit the White House again. Ever. Not now, not in four years, not in eight years.
If Hillary is the nominee, you will in effect be electing a Republican yet again. Oh, I know you don’t think so. “She’s a fighter. She’s tough. The Republicans really don’t like John McCain, and the country is ready for a change.”
Don’t kid yourself. Because if you do, you’ll be shooting yourself in the foot yet again. The only control you might have is which foot and how many toes you can blow off.
And quit any comments about the idiocy of the conservative wing of the Republican Party. You need to look in the mirror.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Monday, March 03, 2008
Not So Random Musings
WHY IS HRC TOUTING EXPERIENCE?
It’s interesting noting that Hillary touts her “experience” and Obama’s lack thereof as reasons she is more prepared. In a speech on Monday excerpted in the Chicago Tribune: "We've seen the tragic result of having a president who had neither the experience nor wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security. We can't let that happen again. America has already taken that chance one time too many."
So how does that jibe with Bill Clinton in 1992? And why does this argument supposedly work against Bush? Clinton was wet behind the ears when it came to national governance. GWB had the advantage of a close family member having been in the White House 8 years earlier. So, who does Hillary’s resume most resemble of the two? Call me silly, but I fail to see Hillary’s argument in any positive light, and I’m betting most of America that has more than an 10th grade education does too.
SPEAKING OF WHICH
We have 3 Senators left in the race. No governors or big-city mayors; only McCain spent time as a congressional representative, serving two terms. None have run a business, though again McCain spent time as VP-Public Relations of an Anheuser-Busch distributorship (due to his current wife Cindy’s familial ownership). Both Obama and Clinton majored in Political Science. McCain attended the Naval Academy. There is a clear winner in the “experience” game, and it’s not Clinton.
TRULY LIBERAL?
Obama is now being touted as an extreme liberal. And I do see some policies that raise my eyebrows. (Raising the cap on FICA taxes, for instance, which could put a serious chill on small businesses.) But when compared to Clinton, the gap between them seems larger than the media is touting. Clinton has this idealistic and naïve zeal, a la Lyndon Johnson, towards a society where the government takes care of everything. Obama seems to recognize the reality of the issues. Hence, if you don’t want to pay in to the federal health care system, in Barack’s world you don’t have to (unless you have children). And don’t come crying when you’re sick and can’t afford to pay, either.
Obama asks for two years of service back to the country in exchange for college subsidies. Yes, he wants out of Iraq immediately (which I also question) but then wants to redouble efforts in Afghanistan and go after Al Qaeda. This isn’t your typical tax-and-spend Democrat peacenik. After 8 years of a Republican who never met a spending bill he couldn’t get behind, I’m not sure we’re going to be committing more federal funds.
AN ELECTION OF ISSUES
McCain offers sharp differences in what he proposes. The problem with Clinton is that she seems to be operating without an apparent logic behind them other than a push towards a much larger welfare state. Obama, on the other hand, seems to have more of an agenda than to have the government taking care of everything. So if it’s Obama-McCain this election might actually be a referendum on the direction we wish to go as Americans. Wouldn’t that be refreshing?
It’s interesting noting that Hillary touts her “experience” and Obama’s lack thereof as reasons she is more prepared. In a speech on Monday excerpted in the Chicago Tribune: "We've seen the tragic result of having a president who had neither the experience nor wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security. We can't let that happen again. America has already taken that chance one time too many."
So how does that jibe with Bill Clinton in 1992? And why does this argument supposedly work against Bush? Clinton was wet behind the ears when it came to national governance. GWB had the advantage of a close family member having been in the White House 8 years earlier. So, who does Hillary’s resume most resemble of the two? Call me silly, but I fail to see Hillary’s argument in any positive light, and I’m betting most of America that has more than an 10th grade education does too.
SPEAKING OF WHICH
We have 3 Senators left in the race. No governors or big-city mayors; only McCain spent time as a congressional representative, serving two terms. None have run a business, though again McCain spent time as VP-Public Relations of an Anheuser-Busch distributorship (due to his current wife Cindy’s familial ownership). Both Obama and Clinton majored in Political Science. McCain attended the Naval Academy. There is a clear winner in the “experience” game, and it’s not Clinton.
TRULY LIBERAL?
Obama is now being touted as an extreme liberal. And I do see some policies that raise my eyebrows. (Raising the cap on FICA taxes, for instance, which could put a serious chill on small businesses.) But when compared to Clinton, the gap between them seems larger than the media is touting. Clinton has this idealistic and naïve zeal, a la Lyndon Johnson, towards a society where the government takes care of everything. Obama seems to recognize the reality of the issues. Hence, if you don’t want to pay in to the federal health care system, in Barack’s world you don’t have to (unless you have children). And don’t come crying when you’re sick and can’t afford to pay, either.
Obama asks for two years of service back to the country in exchange for college subsidies. Yes, he wants out of Iraq immediately (which I also question) but then wants to redouble efforts in Afghanistan and go after Al Qaeda. This isn’t your typical tax-and-spend Democrat peacenik. After 8 years of a Republican who never met a spending bill he couldn’t get behind, I’m not sure we’re going to be committing more federal funds.
AN ELECTION OF ISSUES
McCain offers sharp differences in what he proposes. The problem with Clinton is that she seems to be operating without an apparent logic behind them other than a push towards a much larger welfare state. Obama, on the other hand, seems to have more of an agenda than to have the government taking care of everything. So if it’s Obama-McCain this election might actually be a referendum on the direction we wish to go as Americans. Wouldn’t that be refreshing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
