POTUS 2008 - I'm (reluctantly) changing my tune

As a Permanent Resident of Canada, I retain my US citizenship and therefore my right to vote there. Of course, since Bush was appointed president and "re-elected", and so for the last seven years has made a complete mess of pretty much the whole world, I take particular interest in the 2008 presidential race. Many tomes can and will be written on the crimes of the current regime of the Republic Under Bush. Most of us are absolutely chomping at the bit for the chance to unseat the Republicans. The question at the moment is who to support in the primaries.

So, who to vote for as the Democratic nominee? In the interest of keeping this to a reasonable length, here's the big three - Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

Edwards? I like the guy. I liked him even more, in fact, when I found out he got a $400 haircut. That's called sharing your wealth, people. I like his poverty activism. And I don't see how him being a self-made wealthy man discredits that one bit. I have always hated that some people insist that in order to be against poverty, you can't possibly have a penny to your name or it's somehow pandering or illegitimate. So, okay, I like Edwards just fine.

Obama? I like him, too. Except that he called Steve the Canadian president.

Clinton. Oh Hillary. While I think she has been a great senator for New York (note - I am not, nor have I ever been, a New Yorker) I have to say, not my fave. And not only because of her AUMF vote, and her subsequent refusal to say she made a mistake in voting for the Iraq war. It's more of a personal issue. I lost a lot of respect for her during the whole stand by her man thing. I mean, one affair? I can see working things out, sticking together, maybe coming out of it stronger as a couple. But come on, teh Clenis is a horn dog who apparently put it to any and every overly made-up bimbo that would have him. And she stayed. I'm not going to guess at why, because it's none of my business. But I know that if my husband embarassed and shamed me on the world stage that way? I would kick his ass to the curb so fast and so hard that he and his checkbook would never recover. I didn't want to have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary.

I've been wishin' and hopin' that Wes Clark would run. I knew he would be a long shot for the nomination, but I really felt that he is
one of the few people in the world that could restore credibility on the world stage to my broken country. His military credentials are
impeccable
. He was a Rhodes scholar and was first in his class at West Point, as well as supreme commander of NATO. So he's incredibly intelligent AND knows war, and military strategy, and is also brave and rather handsome. Unlike some other presidents we have known. Ahem. Oh, and did I mention that he has always been against the Iraq invasion and occupation?

Alas, Wes is not going to run. I have vivid fantasies, though, of him being made Secretary of State.

Now. That being said, I've always felt that no matter who got the nomination, they would be 1000x better than any sleazy pig the Republicans could muster up. And I stand by that. Whoever the Democrats nominate, I will support them 100%, without reservation. I will campaign, I will send money, I will try to GOTV. THAT is how bad the Republicans are.

The USA is one supreme court justice away from overturning Roe v. Wade. There will be court challenges coming up (I hope) concerning domestic spying, torture, the PATRIOT Act, and corporate overlordiness in general. Who do I want appointing judges? Not Fred Thompson. Not Ron Paul. Not Mitt Romney or Ghouliani. I want a Democrat, even one who has accepted funds raised by "Uncle" Rupert Murdoch.

This morning I read that Wes Clark is endorsing Hillary Clinton. Oh. Kay.

Clark, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, praised the New
York senator as "a remarkable person" with the skills and experience to
be president.

"She will be a great leader for the United States
of America and a great commander in chief for the men and women in
uniform," Clark told reporters in a conference call with the former
first lady.

I thought it over. And over. And I may yet change my mind. But for now, because I respect the opinion of the General, I will cautiously support Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic candidate. I already have a Hillary '08 t-shirt that my sister got me in the airport in D.C., which I folded up and put in my t-shirt drawer because I couldn't throw it away - it was a gift, after all. I'll get the shirt out, and hope of hopes, if Clinton is elected, she will either choose Wes as her running mate (oh.....that thought makes me soooooo happy.....) or make him Sec. of State so he can start cleaning up the horrendous mess left by Condi. Not sure that he'd 'fill her shoes', as I don't know if Ferragamo makes them that big. But he could certainly kick her ass in a diplomacy contest.

Uh - Go Hillary '08!

Clark for HRC? Say it isn't so

Wes for Hillary? Arkansas sticking together?
Wonder what his son (ENOUGH protest leader) thinks about that.

HRC has been stepping over CodePink people for years, and if I were Stateside I'd have been stepped over, too. I've seen a video of her endorsing nuclear attacks. I don't trust either of the C's at all.

Obama - never. He's pro old energy, pro AIPAC, too smooth, likely to go with the prevailing winds and not what is right, and was endorsed by Oprah - who, as you may recall, has made some big mistakes in the past. She also endorsed the war, when she should have asked questions.

Gore-Edwards?

*sigh*

If Gore stepped in

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.

I don't know what to think about Clark's support for her. But I do know that I want that man in the cabinet somewhere. I don't think Hillary is any more corporately owned or pro-war than any of the other candidates, with the exception of Kucinich who I don't care for at all.

There is certainly much about her that I am not crazy about.

At least she's solidly pro-choice. Unlike Ron Paul - I had no idea that someone who was so against the government being involved in the personal and financial lives of citizens could be so keen on taking away that basic privacy right away from women. Fuck that noise. You hear me Ron Paul supporters who have Dugg my Fred Thompson journals? I will NEVER support someone who wants to control my uterus - a clump of cells that is the beginning of a baby does NOT have more rights than a fully formed human woman, you Digg? Not to mention a free market true believer - that's going GREAT for healthcare, ain't it. Anybody who trusts corporations more than a government 'of the people' is not one who I want RUNNING THE F'ING GOVERNMENT! And anyone who votes for someone who hates the government so much to BE IN that government has got NO COMMON SENSE. We've seen how well 7 years of that has worked out.

There is no justice in Candy Land.

Video: Hillary Clinton Is Willing to Nuke Iran

Adult Advisory - 1 Minute Video - with scary realistic nuke victims scenario
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18285.htm

Save Edwards, not one candidate is helping New Orleans

They could run campaigns from NOLA, lend a hand, encourage action and donation, show us how they would lead and rule... but no.

Um, interesting video. nt

There is no justice in Candy Land.

Edwards says pretty much

the same thing. That nothing should be "taken off the table" when it comes to dealing with a possible nuclear Iran.

There is no justice in Candy Land.

Good old Terminator 2

Ahhh, the nuclear bomb scene from Terminator 2. Those special effects still hold up pretty well, not bad for a movie from 1991. I seem to remember my friends and I got tickets to a kids movie and sneaked into T2. I guess I was 12 then? Good times...

As for the statement by HRC, of course she and any other mainstream presidential candidate is going to say that no option is off the table. Otherwise, you get portrayed as a hippy-dippy loon like they do with Kucinich.

Is that what that's from?

I've seen T2 a few times but never that part. LOL!

As far as that video, talk about disengenuous. Every politician says that stuff to AIPAC - they are one of the groups who must be pandered to. And you're right, they can't say that no option is off the table (except maybe impeachment), or they get painted as "soft on terra". And then we end up with President Thompson. *ptew!

War is terrorism


Adult advisory.
This account of the bombing of Hiroshima is from the BBC. Japan was ready to come to the peace table but America dropped the bomb all the same - twice. Now America has 150,000 bombs like this - and other horrors, untold and uncounted. The money spent on each bomb could build hundreds, perhaps thousands of schools and hospitals.

Few Canadians joke about these matters.

I'm going to assume

that you misunderstood me. My LOL was for the T2 movie scene being added to the end of a snippet of Hillary Clinton addressing AIPAC. You certainly don't need to lecture me on the horrors of nuclear war, or even nuclear power generation, as evidenced by my largely ignored 2 front page journals on the impending nuclear plant in Peace River, Alberta.

Hillary Clinton apparently has the friendship and counsel of General Wesley Clark, who is AGAINST war with Iran, and FOR diplomacy. And she is not a stupid woman, nor a warmonger, nor is she an apocolyptic Christian. Running for the nomination, she has to have AIPAC in her corner, at least for the time being. She didn't say, "...and we'll nuke them into a sheet of glass and laugh while we're launching...mwahahahahaha!" She said the very vague "no options are off the table". John Edwards said the same exact thing to the same people.

I don't really appreciate you playing the "you're an outsider" card, Tigana. "Few Canadians joke about these matters." That wasn't very nice.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.