
So, I'd started to like her. And then she lost some primaries. And when she lost some primaries she started attacking Barack Obama, who I think quite frankly is the real thing, despite all of the indie-band-of-the-moment hype that's surrounded his campaign. It's perfectly ordinary and right for one candidate to attack another's platform, to attack the perceived holes in their theories and plans, but Hill started to attack Obama in the cheapest place possible: His faith. Now, I'm not a religious man. I have my beliefs and would consider myself somewhat spiritual, I guess, but certainly not religious. My problems with the church are expansive and deep-seeded. But Obama is religious, and this is something that is important for an American president to be, and despite my leanings I think that religious faith is incredibly impressive these days and on some level I envy it. I find his faith comforting because it doesn't seem put-on to me, the way George W.'s does, or even Hillary's; it seems real and profound and the kind of thing that would help to keep him running the White House with a good heart, and an eye towards doing right. Anyway. Hillary started to attack his faith, insinuating that the man is a Muslim, and hypocritically mocking his Christianity openly.
I'm not even sure where to start with this.
A candidate for the presidency using the fact that an opponent's name sounds Muslim, and that his skin-color makes him appear Muslim is disgusting on so many levels, the most disgusting of which is that fact that it clearly spells out that she believes that being a Muslim is something of which the country should be weary, because, of course, Muslims are terrorists and want to kill all white people and have no souls or consciences and hate democracy and everything for which the USA stands. (FUN FACT! The USA is in fact not a democracy, it's a republic... This country, committed to spreading the cause of democracy around the world, does not even practice democracy within it's own shores.)
That she attacked his supposed Muslim religion while at the same time making fun of his Christianity exposed her as the sort of desperate, pathetic politician that gives all politicians such bad reputations. She showed herself to be an opportunist with little in the way of morals, and even less in the way of political savvy. (It's a good thing that in the USA political savvy doesn't count for much.)
When Al Gore lost the race for the White House to George W. Hillary, among many, many others blamed Ralph Nader, for taking votes away from Gore by running as an independent and staying in the race well past making a point.
Six months ago Barack Obama was polling without exception well ahead of Clinton and McCain. He was a lock. Now, it's ridiculous to think his numbers were going to stay as strong as they were, but he was in an incredible position, and the idea of the Republicans successfully side-stepping George W.'s legacy was a ridiculous. Even Republicans were admitting a almost insurmountable uphill battle.
But Clinton kept attacking, and attacking. and attacking. She's been in the race months after a victory became a practical impossiblity. The math is a joke. She can't win the nomination. She's been beaten by Obama and beaten again, but still she stays in attacking the man who will surely be her party's nominee for president, weakening the Democratic ticket every time she opens her mouth, and giving the Republicans -now sitting quietly watching her single handedly destroying her party- ammunition. "The Democrats can't even agree on a candidate! We picked one months ago! Ours must be much better than their guy!" Now McCain is polling even and in some cases ahead of Obama. She's Ralph Nader, but worse. You could say "Well, everything Hillary is saying would have come up eventually," and this is true. But: It's a hell of lot worse when it's coming from inside your own house than when it's coming from the people across the street. Had McCain attacked Obama's religion -and to be far, I don't believe he would- it could have been painted as party politics. But when Hillary says it? It's real now. It's a legitimate concern.
We're facing another four years of a Republican White House. Four more years of a party with no love for the poor or visible minorities. Four more years of a party willing to kill it's country's enlisted youth to make a point. And this because of an egotistical opportunist.
And here's a cheap shot for the haters:
(Hey, she's throwing the cheap shots around like tennis balls... She should expect a couple back, no?)

2 comments:
i am giving you your first blog comment. yay for you.
now, i'm not saying i don't like obama. i agree that he's the better man to lead the US democratic party. but i hope that if he manages to become president, that he leaves his religiossity out of it. history has shown that when religion and politics are in bed together, as they so frequently are, that they have a way of causing war and pain and suffering. and i am not referring to islam here (christianity, i'm looking in your direction). i would like to see an atheist leader. atheism doesn't make a person bad... it just means he has more time and energy to devote to the things that really matter, like... not religion.
NOt sure I agree... Some very good presidents have been very religious. (I heart Harry Truman.) I don't think in the case of the United States it's the religion in the White House that leads to wars. I don't think the US would go to war over religion. What leads to war in their case is money and oil. If the US elected a president dedicated to finding alternative fuels (not soy diesel, REAL alternatives... It takes one liter of oil to make one liter of soy diesel...) the country woul likely soon find itself war-free.
Post a Comment