one candidate at a time–or two

so, brain is washed and coffee is in hand. time to look at the two front runners: Obama & Clinton.

When Obama first showed up on the political scene, I was so hopeful. He seemed like the Arthur Ashe/Tiger Woods of politics. And now, he’s running for prez! And so is Hillary and you’d think that this would be intensely interesting. For the first time we have a viable black candidate and a really strong woman running for office, AND they are the front runners! Any liberal feminist worth her salt would be delirious with joy at the thought.
After watching the debate, all I can say is status quo, status quo, status quo.

Obama/Clinton on the Iraq war is a joke. Oh, they might get us out, but not completely. Obama stated in the debate that he would increase the number of ground troops to relieve those who are already there. Is that any way to end a war? Ok, so he means beef up the military and recruit more soldiers. All fine and dandy but this takes time and is irrelevant to the withdrawal issue. This statement shows he will support the military so that he can get hawkish votes.

He says the war is dumb. duh. He wants the troops out by March 31, 2008. yay!
But go to his website, and you won’t see much of an exit plan. You will see a stern picture of him and text that basically says nothing. In the debate, he fell back on his very tired statement, “There’s no military solution to this. There’s got to be a political solution.” alrighty then…can you elaborate or find another statement to repeat for the rest of the campaign?”

Far more troublesome is Obama is setting the stage for the US to invade Iran. He said, “Iran possessing nuclear weapons will be a major threat to us and to the region. … If we have nuclear proliferations around the world that is a profound threat to the security of the United States.” Gravel called him on this and supplied us with the only excitement of the night, pointing out that his rhetoric (all options are on the table) allows for the use of nuclear weapons. I have no doubt that Hillary is set and ready for the same solution to an escalating problem. Her husband had no qualms about using force and she’s cut from the same political cloth. I think she’d be willing to go farther. I hope I’m wrong.

It’s no surprise that it’s hard to find out exactly where Clinton stands on the issues. Her official website, doesn’t have an “Issues” category (all the other candidates have it, with Kucinich’s the most detailed). I finally found a site that details her stand on the issues–go here:
Unfortunately, I don’t see any real plans for getting stuff done.

Hillary squirmed unsuccessfully over the issue of having voted for the war and now wanting to get out. “If I’d known then what I know now…” yeah yeah, whatever I’m sorry, this just doesn’t cut it. Not when she says it, not when any of them say it. How come WE all knew from the beginning that the reasons Shrub used to invade Iraq were bogus and those in Congress didn’t? puh-leeze. The only reason these guys voted last week to get out of Iraq was because they knew Bush would veto (cuzz, like he TOLD them he would). Empty political play-pretend vote.

I wonder why nobody is talking about torture?

Neither of them are talking about healthcare in any meaningful way. Clinton was so burned by her failed attempt at health care reform back in the 90s that she stated flatly that she wouldn’t touch it. If her handlers weren’t so good at their job, she’d have flinched. She said she wouldn’t throw money at a broken system. So, where does that leave us? Fix the system? Can’t do it without money. How about dismantle it and give us universal care? Not gonna happen. Allow the 47 million uninsured to “…buy into existing insurance programs”? I hate to clue you, but the reason they don’t have insurance is they can’t afford it. This is such a no plan that it’s pathetic.

Climate change — they all call it “climate change.” I give up. They both talk about it in the usual sense: lower emissions (whenwhenwhen), ethanol (despite the impact on food production/prices and devastation of rainforests), renewable energy sources (are you finally gonna FUND wind and solar), clean coal. CLEAN COAL? I’m sorry, coal is NOT the way to go. It’s not only old technology but the coal industry devastates the land, has the most dismal labor practices (Dickens would have a field day), and I gotta say, when they aired those commercials with the sexy, scantily-clad, hotXXX babes down in the coal mines writhing to “You load 16 tons and what do you get…” I just can’t say enough bad things about it. I mean I simply can’t…the words start spluttering before they leave my brain. “…another day older and deeper in debt.”

any other issues?

Yes, there are lots, but I look and I look and basically, Clinton and Obama are both status quo on everything. Nothing new. Nothing innovative. Nothing that is not highly political and pandering to business (as usual). They are playing it safe in order to remain the front runners and we will have no surprises from either of them. Obama is slick, sophisticated and the more I see him the more I realize he’s all politics and no substance. And Obama’s “new politics” is the same ol’ same ol’. Hillary is running the same campaign Bill did. Even the same words, “The country is ready for a change.” Looks to me like the more things change the more the stay the same in Clinton-land.

Hillary will probably win the nomination and she’ll nominate Obama as her running mate and I will sink into a deep 4 year depression.

next up, Richardson maybe? but, after i air out.

2 thoughts on “one candidate at a time–or two

  1. brni says:

    Clinton and Obama are playing to the middle (this country’s center being other country’s right wing…), trying to secure moderate republican and ex-southern democratic votes. They know that none of the others have a chance, what with the media ignoring them and all.

  2. irishkerry says:

    My only consolation
    My only consolation in all of this is that any democrat, given the opportunity, will select better Supreme Court nominees than any republican. Unfortunately, even if the opportunity arises, it won’t change the overall vote balance, I’m sure — but at least it won’t get any worse.
    What a sad state to be in — when the best I can hope for is for things not to get any worse on one pathetic front . . .

Leave a Reply