Barrack + Hillary = DOOM
Well, I teased this last week but didn't get around to posting it, so here's the gist.
I've been thinking this a while, and I've tried to post this a couple of times, but I never got to the end of it 'cause I end up rambling on the multiple complaints I've silently had about the Democrats the last two elections.
I normally don't post political stuff, 'cause while I consider the topic every once in a while, it's not a subject on which I tend to have lengthy, serious thoughts. And this post is barely going to qualify. Truthfully, though, and it may be that those few of me who know me well can vouch for this: my off-the-cuff, non-pondered thinking tends to be some of my best, sharpest thinking.
Anyway.... I'm gonna say a coupla things that, to me, seem starkly obvious and really unavoidable, but I haven't heard it mentioned much. Then again, the "news" media pisses me off even when they're not covering Paris Hilton, so maybe I missed it.
But here it is:
Do we really think this country is ready to elect
A) A woman whose husband, while terribly popular, had an elicit affair in the White House or
B) a black man named Barack Obama?
Y'know, maybe I'm being a bit pessimistic, but then again, we're talking about the American voting public here, so I can't think I'm too far off base by underestimating them.
**cough** **Bush** **cough** **twice** **cough**
And it's not as if Republicans are gun-shy about being divisive and scaring the hell out of the undecided folks. Between gay marriage, abortion, gun control, terrorism, national security, religion, and "family values" there're a lot of cracks in the Democratic armor. Do we want add a few more?
Putting these two in the national spotlight, while terribly inspiring and, I'm sure, completely capable, just seems to me to be a very risky, though admirable, gamble.
To borrow a phrase from Aaron Sorkin: "America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight."
It's something the Democratic Party has failed to realize and something they've failed to take into account during their recent campaigns. And this "Hey, we're not Republicans. We didn't cause this mess" routine didn't cut it last time around.
You have to take the time to explain that hey, just because I want you to have choices doesn't mean we have to agree.
I think you have the right to burn a flag, but I wouldn't do it.
I'd never counsel my wife or daughter to have an abortion under any circumstances, but a 43 year-old businessman from Vermont shouldn't be making that decision for a 19 year-old rape victim in Seattle, y'know?
And just because you think it's inhumane to torture suspected terrorists doesn't mean you stood up and applauded when the planes crashed into the World Trade Center.
So if you can't explain that, why heap even MORE reason to second guess? Why give the other side more fuel to spread fear?
The candidates are qualified. They're progressive. They may be able to lead this country in the right direction. But they're different. And I just seriously doubt if they can win. And no way any of the reasonable moderate Republicans make it out of the primaries.
So where would that leave us? And who would that leave us with?
Maybe "doom" is overstating it a bit, but still....
I've been thinking this a while, and I've tried to post this a couple of times, but I never got to the end of it 'cause I end up rambling on the multiple complaints I've silently had about the Democrats the last two elections.
I normally don't post political stuff, 'cause while I consider the topic every once in a while, it's not a subject on which I tend to have lengthy, serious thoughts. And this post is barely going to qualify. Truthfully, though, and it may be that those few of me who know me well can vouch for this: my off-the-cuff, non-pondered thinking tends to be some of my best, sharpest thinking.
Anyway.... I'm gonna say a coupla things that, to me, seem starkly obvious and really unavoidable, but I haven't heard it mentioned much. Then again, the "news" media pisses me off even when they're not covering Paris Hilton, so maybe I missed it.
But here it is:
Do we really think this country is ready to elect
A) A woman whose husband, while terribly popular, had an elicit affair in the White House or
B) a black man named Barack Obama?
Y'know, maybe I'm being a bit pessimistic, but then again, we're talking about the American voting public here, so I can't think I'm too far off base by underestimating them.
**cough** **Bush** **cough** **twice** **cough**
And it's not as if Republicans are gun-shy about being divisive and scaring the hell out of the undecided folks. Between gay marriage, abortion, gun control, terrorism, national security, religion, and "family values" there're a lot of cracks in the Democratic armor. Do we want add a few more?
Putting these two in the national spotlight, while terribly inspiring and, I'm sure, completely capable, just seems to me to be a very risky, though admirable, gamble.
To borrow a phrase from Aaron Sorkin: "America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight."
It's something the Democratic Party has failed to realize and something they've failed to take into account during their recent campaigns. And this "Hey, we're not Republicans. We didn't cause this mess" routine didn't cut it last time around.
You have to take the time to explain that hey, just because I want you to have choices doesn't mean we have to agree.
I think you have the right to burn a flag, but I wouldn't do it.
I'd never counsel my wife or daughter to have an abortion under any circumstances, but a 43 year-old businessman from Vermont shouldn't be making that decision for a 19 year-old rape victim in Seattle, y'know?
And just because you think it's inhumane to torture suspected terrorists doesn't mean you stood up and applauded when the planes crashed into the World Trade Center.
So if you can't explain that, why heap even MORE reason to second guess? Why give the other side more fuel to spread fear?
The candidates are qualified. They're progressive. They may be able to lead this country in the right direction. But they're different. And I just seriously doubt if they can win. And no way any of the reasonable moderate Republicans make it out of the primaries.
So where would that leave us? And who would that leave us with?
Maybe "doom" is overstating it a bit, but still....
posted by Drewby at
3:06 PM
3 Comments:
I don't know when the "ready" stamp will even be placed on this country. No one deemed the US ready to elect a Catholic in 1960. Plenty would have said that it wasn't, but it happened anyway. There will always be grounds for naysaying, just as there will always be cause to think the pool water is too cold. Sometimes you just have to jump right in.
You bring up a good point, but I'd counter that the country was moving in the opposite direction at that time, going more progressive. Same kinda thing when Clinton was elected after Bush Sr. and a period of stagmnation.
Now, the trend is to reign things in, making them "safer" and increasingly homogenized. FCC's cracking down at the behest of small, chihuahua-like watchdog groups. Terrorism has people willing to give up any number of civil rights in order to feel safe, and there's a decent enough portion that's willing to completely strip people who are different of their civil rights all together.
And in the end, Kennedy was a Catholic, but he was still a white Christian. And his name wasn't Barack Obama.
Is the country ready for a Mormon?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home