A Woman's Got The Power
Some go to less vitriolic houses of worship. Some to yoga classes. Some poor souls venture to have their ears rung out at the opera.
For me, concerts always did the trick before I graduated to more comfortable surroundings of television and film.
But being in the crowd at Montgomery County Community College today (March 24, one day after turning the ripe old age of 43) to see and hear Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded me of moments in time I thought were lost. It sent me back to when I was in my teens. Back to when concerts sent chills up my spine the second my idols would hit the stage.
Perhaps part of this is because I experienced Clinton's appearance like the teen G2 I thought I had buried.
There was the lost art of spontaneity, as I didn't decide to drive the short distance from my house to attend the political rally until I assured myself that my little girl, Sofia, had a full belly and a clean diaper while her grandpa watched her in my absence as her quest to take those magical first steps continued.
Once I arrived at the campus, I saw the line forming in the far-off distance and wondered if I had made the right choice.
I shared the tension with the nice lady from Radnor and her 11-year-old daughter in front of me in line and, by the time we made it to the door (where, of course, I set off the metal detector), I may have gotten the woman, an undecided voter, thinking my way.
Instead of trying to big-time it and flash press credentials, I waited in this long line to get in with concerns - like in those concert-going days before I had connections - that I'd be one of those parceled out to the "overflow room."
But I wasn't.
I got a spot on the floor, close to the stage, in the "real" room as the excitement built much the way it did when I saw The Rolling Stones open their world tour back in 1981 or when I saw Bruce Springsteen or U2 for the first time.
While Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel was the best warm-up act this side of the Greg Kihn Band, I was there for the real deal.
And Clinton - like those aforementioned musicians - did not disappoint, hitting every high note as she ran through her agenda in an informative, refreshing and inspiring way.
If I entered with any doubts about her being fit to lead, they were erased. They can talk all they want about the charisma of other candidates. She has plenty of it as well.
Yes, I left MCCC so silly for Hillary that I had a little stuffed animal in my back pocket to give to my princess at home.
It should be noted that the event was sponsored by a group called Pennsylvania Women for Hillary, so she tailored her remarks toward the women that I'd say made up 75 percent of the audience (no complaints about that here).
You could even go so far as to say that Clinton, who walked onto the gym's stage with a smile as broad as her lead in the commonwealth, played the "woman card" the way her Democratic rival, Barack Obama, has played the "race card" since his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said some "stuff" about America that we're being told is common in many black churches.
As ugly as the hunt for the nomination appears to be getting between Clinton and Obama, she drew a surprising - and encouraging - eruption of applause when she assured the crowd that the party would be unified because, as she said, "none of these things I've talked about today will happen if (presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain) is president."
Clinton - whose topics not only ranged from, but ably linked, health care and economics and education and the environment - saved her best zingers not for Obama, but for the current president.
"We've been through tougher times in America," she said. "But we've never been through tougher times with a worse president."
Although I was playing the part of a civilian, I tried to sit back and take it all in without too much of a show of emotion. On that one, I had to do something. I clapped my hand against my notebook. And I nodded. And, I swear, she looked at me for a brief second and nodded back at me. Then again, I swear Tom Petty looked at me once, too.
That aside, I left the sprawling campus with an adrenaline burst born out of the fact that I had been correct in everything I'll be trying to say to all of you -- both here and in my weekly column space -- about who is the best remaining candidate (don't get me started on John Edwards) for this country.
What did hit me is how much it means to women for Hillary to be elected. This fact gets lost amid the frenzy that Obama - though half-white and not even descended from American slaves - is seen as a source of inspiration to blacks.
I never thought too much about Hillary's gender, but I understand a little more now.
I also never gave much thought to Obama's race in this whole thing, only to the rock-star status given to him by the over-adoring media.
But I saw a rock star today, too. One with songs of substance over style.
My only regret is that my daughter was too young, at a week shy of one year on the planet, to tote along for the show.
It was, as I will tell her one day, something to treasure.
And it is only fitting that it took place as those first steps beckon.
39 Comments:
Gordy - Glad you got out to see what is happening in the world. Hoffel & Sestak are the opening acts here in the Del. & Montg. Area for the Clintons. Hillary should have made her words heard on all subjects at least two months ago - sorry! The delegates, unless she is able to secure all of them in the remaining states will not make her #1. on the Dem. Ticket. Super Delegates (i.e. Sestak) may make a difference, but only if he does not follow the will of the voters here in PA.
Now the key for Dems is if Obama gets the nomination Hillary supporters must back him and if Hillary gets the nomination Obama supporters must back her. Otherwise we get John ("I don't understand economics") McCain who still doesn't realize Al-Qaeda is Sunni and Iran is Shiite - thus they are opponents not allies.
Oh, shut up already, Gordon!
Why would you come onto someone's blog and take the time to tell them to hush when the whole point of a blog is share thoughts and ideas??
Gordon,
Your rock star would be a disaster as President. Her handling of Health Care in 1993 enabled the Republican Revolution of 1994. That begat Ken Starr and the Devil with the Blue Dress.
I cannot vote for Hillary for the simple reason that we will lose the Congress with her as the candidate. She is tooooo polarizing.
I will vote for Obama first, if he doesn't make it, McCain second, and Homer Simpson third. Any of these three can bring the country together better than the sexual polarization you described of Hillary Clinton.
Your beef with Obama is his pastor, not Obama. There are a lot of Catholics still in church but don't believe what the church is about. They find other things to draw them there, whether it is the higher power resident in the Eucharist or the fellowship of their neighbors. To impose your values into the spiritual mind of person of another faith is flat out wrong and smacks of a religous facism.
If you use Obama's pastor againt him, then is it ok to use other people religions or religous leaders against them?
Given the tone and timbre of your editorial writing you would be the first offended if things were taken out of context of your faith.
Wow! You really are a nerd, Joe. I bet you are a 40-year-old virgin.
Yes, Kimmy, Joe must be a nerd -- he used logic and reason and literacy. How in hell that translates to being a 40-year-old virgin, I haven't a clue, but it must be clear to you.
Joe, for what it's worth, I think your comments are right on. With the exception of voting for McCain over Hillary -- as polarizing and as frustatingly ambitious as she is, she is still a much better 2nd choice than "100 Years" (in Iraq; not his age) McCain.
If you want to get chicks, you have to be with the chicks. You should have been there at MCCC yesterday. It was awesome! Mr. Glantz was right about how much this means to women of all kinds and you make no sense.
Hey Nerdly,
If you read Gordon's stuff, which you obviously don't, he subscribes to no religion. He finds them all laughable, as do most people of reason, and would take no offense.
Go drop a dime to Spitzer ...
Kimmy: One must go to a community college to meet a girl of your stature.
Kimmy,
I'm in my late 40's with 3 kids and 20+ years of very happy marriage. Lest you think I wouldn't support a woman for a top post, I have busted my butt for folks like MMM, Lynn Yeakel and Connie Williams. All very high quality people. Hillary doesn't cut it since she's been there and screwed up so badly.
Anonymous,
I appreciate the back-up - Thanks.
Danny Boy,
Here's some comments from Gordon's blog from Dec 25, Christmas, about Christmas (he has the archive if you want the full context)...
[But it all points to a larger picture. Making an annual fuss about this has less to do with religion and more to do with filling empty lives with a sense of wanting to feel superior to your neighbor because you are in on something he or she isn't.]
As a recovering Catholic, who buys into what Catholicism preaches but not it's execution, I find Gordon's line of thought more than a little offensive. Gordon has issues with religions organized or not that aren't his.
One does not need to be a member of an organized Christian stripe to believe the promise of what both Christmas and Easter are about.
These holidays are not displays to make someone else feel bad, it is the promise that what starts here doesn't end here. These are my holidays and my faith that I don't like being denigrated.
By contrast I would never make similar statements about Yom Kippur, Purim, or Hanakkah.
There are distinctions between religion and faith and respect for people who are devout that Gordon doesn't always see.
As is his right as a writer and member of the press he can believe and say whatever he wants.
As a reader, I can use his writing and thoughts to discount or enhance his point of view and allow it to give more or less weight or credence to what he says.
His take on Obama and his retired preacher is filtered through this lens, just like my take on Gordon and his writings are filtered through my lens.
I am asking Gordon to take his glasses off and agree that we have women problems to which Hillary may or may not be an answer, but we also have larger and more immediate race and religion problems, that Obama is a more solid solution for.
I will, in return, try to keep my filters turned off while reading Gordon's columns.
Gee Joe, a wife and kids and everything. Aren't you awesome? I guess it proves that there really is somebody for everybody. Does your wife know about this fixation with Gordon? Maybe some counseling or something to work through it?
Joey,
For starters, no one should be getting personal with you on here. Sorry that has happened.
Respectfully, I must disagree with you about where Gordon seems to stand on religion. The consistent message I've gotten from him, more in his columns than his blog, is to challenge Christians to really think about "What Jesus Would Do?"
He, as well as I, find it funny that many conservatives see themselves as Christians when they are me-first types to the max.
He is only staying consistent with his remarks about Rev. Wright. I also think he finds it funny to learn that Obama went to this guy's church. That's all. It's ironic. Gordon was backing Edwards, and then Clinton, long before this Rev. Wright revelation (alas, those blogs are also archived). He, like me, doesn't get the hype about Obama.
Ok guys let's get back to politics. Why is Hillary the 'wrong' woman to make history but Obama the 'right' black?
Kinda silly since he is only part black anyway and only joined that church to seem more black and get elected in chicago.
The doubel standards in this election have been like neon signs about sexism.
No, Sumer, you can't do that. Politics and religion are interlocked in this country of ours. It is an unfortunate reality. Can't talk of one without the other.
That said, I agree with your premise about the double standard.
Also, Mr. Gordo's last column pretty much mocked the tradition of a becoming a man 13 in the Jewish faith.
Did you read that Joe?
Hey guys, I'm back. Miss me? Someone explain why Hillary is toooooo polarizing? I can't understand why she is so unpopular. Is because men see her as a threat?
And Joe, sorry about yesterday. I was PMS-ing.
Tlees2 & Gordy TOO --- Politics is an ongoing education...Hillary, knew her husband had problems (women/military service)but encouraged & backed him when he ran for Governor & President of the USA. The Dem. Party also turned their back on his record and as a result his fine Cabinet Members did their job & we watched him spend long hours in the office when he was President and did what pleased him..."because I could"...Now, exactly what do we know about Hillary?? She will say just about anything or side step any questions about a subject that she feels will put her in a bad light... Billy Clinton will be in Pottstown Thursday Eve... So,on with my/your learning experience, I'm pressing off my blue dress and heading to Pottstown High on Thursday Eve...See you there Gordy...no need for you to put on a blue dress...just place "PRESS" over your heart...that should do it.
Jen,
Nice double team - you can do better.
Oz,
No problem. We can have different views without being disagreeable.
Part of what I take from Gordon's columns a sense of defensiveness and I account for that when reading his stuff. After all he's the only Blue voice in the Times Hearld's House of Red. I think he's a good egg.
I am also looking thru the hype. I wasn't that much impressed with the Obama Girl videos, in fact it put me off a little bit. I was looking hard at Richardson because of the varied experiences and the fact he is a governor. I don't think being a senator (legislative branch) gives the type of experience you need as a governor (executive branch).
When Richardson dropped, I was already looking at the rest of the field.
The more I saw of Obama, the more he compares favorably to Kennedy (Robert or John).
He is where he is in spite of his race and background (kind of like Bill Clinton, who I'd vote for another couple of times, but Hill is not Bill). As more grenades are being thrown at him, he is one cool customer.
I would have no problem with the 3 am call coming to him.
Sumer,
Good questions. Hillary has had her shot and blew it. She is not a natural politician. Bill is. Obama is. It is just something you have, like a good musician. You can develop the attribute, as Hillary has, but it's not natural.
She's now getting caught up in her own misstatements and has a tendency towards a bunker mentality.
Obama, being half and half, and as I read more about him, his experiences in other parts of the world growing up (another Kennedy parallel) gives a pre-programmed perspective that he may be able to handle foreign policy better. He may have gaffes here and there, but they don't appear to be fatal.
Hillary's experience as a suburban Goldwater Republican convert just doesn't cover the same breadth. She may have gotten her experiences in Chicago, but she is still coming from the nicer side of the tracks.
Scott,
I did read the piece, and I kept thinking, that this is what Gordon is writing for Easter Morning.
Kimmy,
No problem.
I don't see Hillary as a threat, but as a Dukakis or a Mondale. We will lose big time.
Even Rush Limbaugh knows this and is running around converting voters, and having an effect. During the Mississippi primary, Wolf Blitzer was there with the primary map and made a comment about how incredibly conservative the northeast portion of the state is. He couldn't figure out why it was going overwhelmingly for Clinton.
The Republicans want us to pick Hillary and are doing every thing they can to make it happen. These are not stupid people.
As for why she is unpopular, the moment I bought into Obama was during the debate when Hillary was cornering Obama into her Farakaan trap. It wasn't good enough for Obama to renounce him, but he had to renounce and reject him.
It spoke volumes for both people. Clinton was theoretically going for the jugular, knowing that some circles are calling Obama a closet Muslim. She was looking for the kill.
Obama looked like Bruce Lee as he cooly took the punch, rolled with it, and ultimatly made Hillary look small and mean.
Even as Hillary was on the ropes a few weeks ago, she stood in front of crowds and mocked Obama and his supporters with her tone of voice as she described the light coming down on Obama.
Say what you like about Reagan, Bush I, Bill Clinton, and Bush II, they never looked or sounded mean. Nixon sounded mean.
Who do I want dealing with Putin and his puppets?
Obama's demeanor is making it easier to just like the guy. (and yes to a certain degree it is a popularity contest - that's why we still have an affable (however inept) Bush II and not a grounded competent Kerry or Gore.)
Sorry if I am being too long-winded or wonkish...
A good egg? How about a broken egg?
Joe - I started reading your entry last afternoon and finished this morning.
Gordy...Misinformation... Billy Clinton WAS in Pottstown - 10AM. Sorry, I really wanted to see him again - it's been 12 years. Our fellow followers of Politics said he really is old looking since his heart attack - too many McDonalds did it in Arkansas. Eat your Veggies Gordy! Yes, they are good for the brain and your looks in general.
I really would like to know how Hillary & Barak feel they can change the minds of other countries that really hate us for whatever reason & how they would respond if another attack occured here on the USA soil. I know the 911 attacks did not just start because George Bush became President - we did nothing when we were attack here and abroad for eight years prior to his taking office. Their answer is important. Our family does not care about the gender/race/religion of the candidate but how they will react & their cabinet will react to another attack or disaster as the last eight years George Bush's administration has had to face.
Just got onto this site today. Well, gee, Gordon, so glad you got that "rock star" feeling. So how does this make Clinton better than Obama?
If you really look at the positions of Clinton and Obama, there are only small differences when compared to the positions of John McCain. The real difference is in the ability to lead and the methods they will use to advance their programs. Obama's work thus far shows that he will bring people together and work with others to advance his programs. Clinton's record indicates a penchant for secrecy (with disastrous results a la her health care program)and adversarial methods.
Clinton constantly denigrates Obama's speeches as "just words." Words can be a powerful tool to make things happen. FDR could inspire us to struggle through the Depression and remain strong during WWII. President Carter couldn't inspsire us to do anything. Why do we remember Winston Churchill as a great wartime leader? Not only because of his deeds, but because of his words of inspiration to the British people and the world. Words do matter. And of course Obama has specific programs to implement.
Anonymous wonders what the candidates would do in a terrorist crises. One thing Obama would not do is end up attacking a country that had nothing to do with it. Throwing your weight around just because you can solves nothing as we have found out to our cost. And here is one major reason to support Obama over Clinton; Senator Clinton voted for the Iraq war. She, like a number of other Democrats, succumbed to fear - the fear of losing in the next election because she thought people would think her "weak." Any other explanation makes her out to be stupid and she is far from that. We need someone who will stand up for what is good for the country, not someone who succumbs to ballet box pressures.
I agree with Joe the nerd when he says that if you condemn Obama for staying in his church, then why not condemn all of us Catholics for staying in ours in the face of the pedophile scandal.
I will have to disagree, however, with those Democrats and Independents who say they will vote for McCain if their candidate does not win the nomination. This is folly. Obama and Clinton look like two peas in a pod when compared with McCain and the Republican party platform. Sure, we all believe one candidate is better than the other, but please don't help condemn our country to another four years of our current, disastrous course. Obama will make a better president that Clinton, but I certainly will never vote for the Republican agenda. It would be a betrayal of all I believe in. Patricia B.
The Greg Kihn Band?? LOL!
I think Gordon, like Hillary, chooses his words well to get you fools going. He got you all going and is probably laughing now while listening to The Boss. As for Patricia B., I agree with most of what you said and I am also voting for Barack. Hillary's latest lie was the icing on the cake for me. But she is treating unfairly on the Iraq thing. Obama wasn't even a senator at the time the war started. And once he was a senator, he also voted pro-war.
Lisa Mossie is a Republican shill
Since there's no place to leave this in response to her column about the so-called "Vets for Freedom," I'm leaving it here. Sorry to hijack the thread; you should add a space for comments under the columns you post.
http://www.prwatch.org/falsies2006
A group calling itself "Vets for Freedom" claimed to be "non-partisan" in early 2006, when it appeared out of the blue and began placing op-ed pieces in the New York Times and other major publications. An investigation by citizen journalists at SourceWatch and by the Buffalo News blew the VFF claim of non-partisanship out of the water. For instance, the Buffalo News revealed in June that former White House flack Taylor Gross, who left Scott McClellan's office in 2005 to start his own PR firm, represented VFF and pitched them to papers as non-partisan journalists who would embed for these newspapers and report accurately and cheaply for them from Iraq. The Wall Street Journal reported that VFF was being handled by Republican strategist Dan Senor, and its website turned out to be the work of the Donatelli Group, the same Republican consulting firm that previously set up Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to attack John Kerry in 2004.
To the anonymous wimp posting above:
One George Soros funded 529 website does not a case make.
Are you refuting the awards these men have won? Are you disputing their accomplishments? Or are you saying that because they've been to Iraq and Afghanistan and because they've bled on the battlefield and because they still support the war that they should be denied a platform to speak?
"Freedom of speach for me but not for thee." You disgust me.
My email is lisamossie@yahoo.com. It's published at the end of every column.
Lisa Mossie is a Republican shill
(Again, GG, sorry for the thread hijack. Wish there was a more-convenient place for this.)
No, Lisa, I'm not at all demeaning the service of these men or their courage. Instead, I'm insulted by a Republican adminstration that would use their service as a front to shovel propaganda about this senseless, endless war.
Make no mistake -- these men were used by George Bush and his team in the Mideast, and they're being used today. Just because we honor their service does not mean that we need to kowtow to the message they've been given by the spinmeisters from the White House.
By the way, Lisa, those little things that are made up of the truth? They're called facts. And, geez, I don't know how to break this to you, but they remain true whether they're published on a website, in the Buffalo News, in the New York Times or on a garage wall. I know that reality is sometimes, oh, inconvenient for you and the 26% still worshipping in the Church of Bush, but you don't refute them just by yelling "George Soros!"
And thanks for the offer to respond via email -- I prefer the fresh air and sunshine of replying in public. And since there's no place to do it under your column, it's here or nowhere.
And the name-calling, Lisa? So mature.
Dear Anonymous Wimp,
Facts may be facts, but spin is spin. The left seems to see all soldiers as nothing but big dumb victims when in fact the opposite is true. Our armed services today, in addition to being 100% volunteer, are the most educated lot in history. Many of the men on the Heroes tour are in fact, college graduates. But as with so many on your side of the aisle, the only good soldier is a dead one that you can exploit as a mounting death toll for your anti-war agenda—or the anti-war vets whom you are quick to grant a platform. God forbid we have one actually support the war, actually see that some good has been accomplished and actually understand our mission? Please shut those guys up immediately. It can’t be real! They must be Republican Shills!
And yes, I am questioning both your patriotism and your support of the troops. Not that it really matters since you are too gutless to post your name out here in the “open air”.
I checked out the website you cite, prwatch.org and it seems on this site that the conservative view of everything is surprisingly unrepresented. Or perhaps not so surprisingly, coming as it does from the People’s Republic of Wisconsin. I understand the need for sites like these, however, because when liberals like you are presented with inconvenient facts, you need to put them through the liberal spin cycle so that your world somehow makes sense again else you end up in a dark corner somewhere, tucked into a fetal position sucking your thumb.
I agree the name-calling isn’t very mature, but since so many posters on this blog don’t have the guts to sign their names to the posts, I had to find a way to distinguish one anonymous poster from the next. I see you had no trouble identifying yourself as the addressee.
Regards, The Republican Shill
…I mean, Lisa Mossie, since we’re doing away with the immature name-calling.
Gordon, "ROCK ON!!". I think Hillary has the most experience on foreign policy and would be a fantastic president. Obama has only been to 3 other countries! I don't think he's ever even been to Iraq. Anyway, I do think the Democratic party will get behind whoever the candidate is in November. If your choice as a Democrat is Barack Obama or John McCain...98% of Dems will go with Obama. I hope it's Hillary, but if it isn't, I'm not going to vote for a pro-life candidate who thinks we need to stay in Iraq and knows very little about how to stimulate the economy or put together a health care program. Hillary's health care program is not perfect but at least she put something out there and it's a step in the right direction for those without. Joe, the nerd, aren't you are only poo-pooing the Dems becasue you had a falling out with them and aren't involved anymore? The Dems have been doing great without you and since you've shown your true colors, no one really give much credence to what you have to say; especially if you are voting for McCain! Maybe you should register Republican and then you can make some new friends who share the same views. I'm appalled that you would vote for McCain as an alternative to Hillary Clinton. You should not call yourself a Democrat.
Hey Anonymous from April 5, 2008 8:44 AM
Is that how you should be addressed? In 1992 we heard the same garbage from the right about Bill Clinton’s lack of foreign experience. It took a year, but it worked out.
I really don’t care what 98% of anybody will do. I am responsible for my own actions.
If the only thing you can vote up or down for someone on is the choice issue, then your blinders are on. (Since no one is talking about that in this election and you led with that reason, I am assuming that is why you exist politically.) McCain will do a better job of leading the country than Hillary, period. Obama can do a better job than either of them. I vote as an American for the best possible American.
There are reasons why Obama is winning. The field operations are far superior to anything run in this county by Clinton (2x), Gore, or Kerry. Stop into the Collegeville campaign office (768 Main Street, 2nd floor, stop by as a spy if you like). Yes, the Obama people realize the region between Norristown and Pottstown if fertile and virgin territory for presidential politics. When you stop in to see the office is manned by local people who believe this guy can win, you’ll notice the professional attitude that isn’t denigrating the opposition. It is a refreshing grown-up way to do politics.
The people there are voting for something, not against a Bush or a Dole.
I also have to thank you for the personal attack. It shows you are truly out of ammo. My stripes are my stripes and I earned them from 1990 on. I had a strong feeling that if I were still on the Democratic committee I would be obligated to work for Hillary. I am viscerally opposed to having THIS woman in any form in the executive branch. It would have been false for me to remain on the committee.
As far as no one giving me any credence, the people at the Obama office seem to be very pleasant to me.
I’ll call myself a Democrat as long as I like (it's kind of like being in a free country).
When Obama is the candidate, I’ll call myself a PROUD Democrat again.
John McCain has vowed to overturn Row v. Wade by appointing judges that will favor such a change in decision. As a woman, ther's no way that I could ever vote for that kind of president. I love how men seem to think they know what it's like to have an unwanted pregnancy and even more disturbing, they think they can legislate how to handle it! Until this country stops stereotyping women as being "whos" and "promiscuous", I'll take a woman president any day. When are men going to own up to their part and stop being so self-righteous? John McCain is a throw back to the dark ages. Not to mention, seems to flip-flop his position on whether alternative fuels are good for the country or bad. I don't know if he has a solid thought of his own on any issue except Iraq, which of course, is the most rigt-wing one.
Joe, the nerd,
I have to agree with anonymous from4/5. When given the choice between Hillary Clinton and John McCain, I find it hard to believe you'll find too many Democrats that wouldn't choose Clinton over McCain. Her record is much more in line with the Democratic party than his. Of course you have to vote your conscience, but I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from as a Democrat.
I think some of the pro-Obama supporters are trying to feel the nostalgia of the 60's all over again. Jump into the 21st century people. Obama is a nice guy but there just isn't enough substance there to qualify him for THIS presidency. George Bush had made such a mess of so many things, that electing someone who is underqualified could be a huge disaster for our country and the problems we need to fix. Whoever the next president ends up being, is getting handed a big lump of crap that they will have a tremendously hard time cleaning up...no matter how inspiring they may be. I want a candidate that has been around the Washington block long enough to know how to work with all of the players and can surrounds themselves with people who can get the job done. I just don't think Obama is quite there yet and I think he knows it too or he'd be out there working harder on foreign issues and not catering so much to domestic ones.
Joe the Nerd,
You lost me when you said you'd support Sen. McCain over Sen. Clinton. Like you I intend to vote for Sen. Obama in the primary. Unlike you I will support the Democratic nominee in the fall regardless of it is Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama. I will work hard to prevent John McCain from winning the election in November because he will continue many of the disastrous policies of George W. Bush. Both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton would be a vastly better President than Sen. McCain.
Anonymous of April 6, 2008 7:58 AM
Anonymous of April 6, 2008 8:09 AM
Tlees
I am an American first and Democrat second. My distrust of Hillary far outweighs our shared misgivings on McCain. I can disagree with someone’s policies and vote for the person because I can still believe they will have the best interest of the country at heart.
Some of our best presidents in the last 60 years came in looking like lightweights, Truman, Kennedy, Reagan, and yes, Bill Clinton.
I am looking for the raw palette of the person because they will undergo profound transformations in the White House.
As a person first, I like both Obama and McCain. I would feel very comfortable and secure with either of them.
McCain has already been fire-tested with an independent streak that should not be discounted.
Obama is getting his time in the crucible and he looks good coming through it.
I have already seen what Hillary’s fire-test looks like and it is not what I want to see.
Hopefully this discussion will be moot because Obama is trending properly to take this state. If he wins here or loses but less than 3 points, Hillary has no shot unless she wants to destroy the party in her wake. (Look at the CNN delegate control and work some of your own realistic numbers.)
If she wins it will be a Pyrrhic Victory. A victory like this will pull down congressional races across the country. If she continues on, she will illustrate that she is not the team player you are asking me to be. So why should I vote for her.
You are asking more of me than you are of your candidate.
Anonymous April 6, 2008 7:54 AM
I didn’t see you comment until just now. I am not crazy about his position on this issue either, but it is being used as a wedge issue.
Since 1980 – almost 30 years we have had only 8 years of a Democratic leadership to secure this right.
The early part of this decade, GW had the whole shooting match at his disposal and still couldn’t get this done.
I have been coming to the opinion that this is a hanging issue that the right will use to mobilize their base to keep us divided over other issues that press us just as badly.
Choice is just too good an issue for the right wing to let go of.
Gordon ... Tonight is your night in Philadelphia - Hillary will be there and after 90 minutes of back and forth with Barack you again will feel like a teen again...The song goes and "I only have eyes for you", but really I did not hear a word you were saying... Enjoy - November is just around the corner.
A lead in PA for Hil sounded great, but a lead of only 22,000 in Indi. is not really a lead. The candidates are: Barack Obama and John McCain. Cut the cost and on to the convention and spend your money in November for the candidate of your choice. No more Photo Ops. or Opening Acts required. As the world problems seem to mount, spend time and money on how we are going to cope with modern day problems. Just the facts. She said - he said is childish... We will applaud you when "mission accomplished" is really accomplished and the "A" Bombs are not a threat to any country. Little countries have nothing to be afraid of since their government is usually run by the military who could care less what will happen if they "made a mistake."
Almost two months have passed since the original Post and now we hear more and more about the vote for "War" ... Candidates have tried to explain their reason for their vote. But, any candidate trying to convince his voters that he/she was right, but a little mistake in judgement should be overlooked... that person is not a candidate for any higher office. Taking credit for some other persons idea on how to solve our world crisis has also come up. Take notes when listening to speakers running for office because anything will fly now and the proof will never be known until after the election.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home