and Hillary Clinton won my conservative heart.
(Bumped-up. New comments.)
I started blogging shortly after Katrina, mostly as a reaction to the horrible work done by the Bush goof squad in response to the Gulf Coast disaster. My outrage about his incompetence was not passed through a racial filter. I titled this blog “Mad In The Middle” because politically I feel I’m in the middle of the spectrum, though I’m so far left on some issues I completely circle the spectrum and end-up agreeing with wingnuts—which disturbs me greatly. I was all about getting rid of the incompetence drowning our Republic. Race did not and still does not enter into this equation.
I had high hopes that the new Congress would demonstrate, if not leadership, at least competence. What they have demonstrated is spines of Jell-o—a willingness to find any reason to capitulate to the Bush Mafia. Most of the leadership needs to be replaced by people who are willing to take these criminals on and put them away.
To that end, I looked at the early presidential contenders and picked a candidate that I felt was most likely to achieve that goal. My candidate was John Edwards. To me, he represented the best choice among compassion, competence, and concern.
In the end, all political choice is about whittling down options. When Edwards suspended his campaign, I looked for the next most likely person to fulfill my agenda. That led me to Hillary Clinton. I leaned her direction because, based on past performance, I knew beyond a shadow of any doubt, that she could stand-up to any Republican challenge. After all, she has already endured decades of the GOP slime machine.
Race did not enter the equation, nor did gender. Guilt did not enter into my calculations either. No one today has been a slave and the “Sins of my father” meme is definitely not something I ascribe to, despite various groups seeking redress for grievances from hundreds of years ago. I know something of this since my own ethnic group has multitudes of grievances with the Feds over stolen land and the public at large for our continued marginalization. Yet, that is the past and this campaign was supposed , supposed, to be all about the future.
My support for Sen. Clinton has hardened to the point that if I cannot vote for her I will not vote. That has occurred almost entirely because of Sen. Obama’s fanatics—note that I did not say supporters for those fanatics go far beyond the pale when profaning Sen. Clinton. He has not helped himself with his church problems either.
I attended a church for many years until one Sunday when I said I will no longer listen to sermons telling me how I should vote. I sat through one of those anti-abortion, anti-woman rants; I did not sit through the second one when it started. I was offended by Wright’s damning of America but I thought the “riding dirty” element was even worse.
My liberal heart has always wanted a minority, especially a Native American, to be elected President so when Colin Powell rose to prominence, I saw a potential President. I even overlooked his involvement in My Lai and his later backstabbing of President Clinton ( who should’ve pulled a Harry Truman and fired him for his back door attacks on Gays In The Military) so strong did my liberal heart beat for a minority to become president. My moderate and conservative hearts also became all a-flutter with Powell. He had it all. He could have become President of the United States in heartbeat.
Then he fell in with George Bush, the man who has become the kiss of death for so many careers. In short, my hopes were left shattered on the floor of the United Nations and I could only think back to those heady days when Shirley Chisholm was receiving my vote for president.
So, in the end, my liberal heart will not beat for Sen. Obama because he is much more a conservative Republican than either of the other two candidates. I have a progressive agenda that includes among other things such radical ideas as legalizing marijuana. I have a moderate agenda that includes such things as allowing everyone’s vote to count (I am not just griping about Florida and Michigan but undemocratic procedures such as caucuses. ) My conservative agenda includes items like gun control, the draft, military service, etc. My conservative heart beats for candidates who really do love and appreciate this wonderful, if flawed, paradise we call America. So which candidate comes closest to all my hearts—there’s only one choice: Hillary Clinton.
Original post date: 4/1/08
Guest post at Taylor Marsh 4/10/08
7 comments:
You oughta do more of these types of posts- enjoyed it much. My lib agenda involves healthcare in some form that operates like Social Security, de-criminalizing marijuana, but maybe not legalizing it (is that possible? Fines instead of jail sentences?)more environmental oversight and more money for education. My conservative agenda includes items like LESS spending on pork, less foreign military Adventures, less free rides for Corporations and less reliance on oil. I also believe that many of these lib/conserv definitions intermix and wrap around. For instance now, it is considered "Conservative" to radically ignore the United Nations. I feel that treading carefully and respecting the rights of other nations is a more Conservative mindset.
To me, actions speak louder than words. Hillary or Obama, in my crystal ball, will ACT much the same in office. Like you, John Edwards was my choice. Hillary has dropped the ball in three ways recently, though: failing to vote on the FISA matter, when Obama did. That's an action that had a consequence with this voter. Then cozying up to the worst of thee worst of Republican hacks: Rush and Scaife. Finally, I believe I've watched this race with a neutral eye for some time. And again and again, I see the Clinton campaign using Rethug tactics to smear her Democratic opponent and actually Cheer on the Republican candidate. So, I am for Obama. Even so, Bob, I'd happily vote for Hillary over McCain. Because I can tell the difference between McCain and Hillary. And if Obama becomes the candidate, I surely hope you (and other HRC supporters) can find it in your heart to see the difference between Obama and McCain.
Fade, you are the first Obama supporter who has ever disagreed with me in a civil fashion. I do appreciate not being a called racist for adopting a policy position. If more Obama supporters will come around to your thinking, I might come around to voting your way. But it will take some effort-- I've been insulted way too often and too hard to just let it slide by.
btw, you do have good legitimate reasons for supporting Obama rather Clinton than some of the emotional drek I keep getting.
I read your reasons for Clinton and against Obama, and while I appreciate what you had to say, I completely disagree with your assessments of both candidates. That's part of living in a democracy. At least your reasons are well-considered and thought-out, and coming from a position of being informed.
There are several reasons I did not vote for Sen. Clinton in the CA primary.
Here's one:
Clinton feels perfectly comfortable, while touting that she "has the experience that matters," to use her recently-announced support for the Stop Security Outsourcing Act, after declining to support it in the wake of the Nisour Square massacre, as being proof of her political record "to match words with action." She claims that her support for this bill "is an indication of what we'll do." The series of events that led up to her finally taking a stand, on Feb. 28, 2008, about the use of private paramilitary forces does, indeed, tell us something about how she might run her administration. It tells us once again that she will not be honest and forthcoming with the American people or with the press, and will only do the bidding of the people over corporate lobbying when it becomes politically expedient to do so.
Here's another:
Sen. Clinton says she didn't know that the Bush/Cheney administration had granted immunity back in 2004 to all private U.S. contractors in Iraq. Hillary was and is a very influential member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which theoretically oversees all aspects of our military. Furthermore, Hillary is a graduate of Yale Law School, and has a well-known professional record in public service. My conclusion? She lied.
I'm tired of the lying. We need something new.
I have more reasons, but I think that's enough grist for the mill.
You do have good reasons and I can understand why you voted against her. For almost exactly the same reasons, I want to vote for someone. Obama has not earned my trust. So given that Edwards is gone and I have no reason to trust Obama, Clinton works for me.
Thanks for an insightful comment.
OK. You made me do it. You made me write another piece about why I support Obama. Thanks for the inspiration!
http://goodgirlroxie.blogspot.com/2008/04/yes-we-can.html
Full disclosure: I orginally supported Vilsack, then Edwards, then Obama. But Obama is much, much more than I first thought way back over a year ago.
it seems to me that the long drawn out spectacle of picking a candidate only forces candidates to make more shady deals for support. with every primary new promises and concessions are made by all the candidates as they try to curry support.
it becomes a show and a potentially good candidate only has to stick his/her foot in their mouth once to lose it all.
i liked kucinich.
If you have not read good girl roxie's post, please go do so-- it is quite good: http://goodgirlroxie.blogspot.com/2008/04/yes-we-can.html
(Every time I've tried to put an actual hot link in here I've blown up the comment so I give up.)
Leo you are right about the primary season. This business is making everyone unnecessarily crazy; I favor four regional primaries, each rotating every cycle to first, second, third and fourth place. I'm also in favor of only primaries and winner take all (tho I'm flexible on that). The whole Iowa-dictates- the-president has to go. That's what set this entire mess in motion.
I liked Dennis, too.
Post a Comment