M. LeBlanc: Playing Cards
Melissa McEwan: For the Record
Echidne: Why Vote For Obama? and Well Worth Reading
Neil Sinhababu: TEN GOOD REASONS FOR AN OBAMA/EDWARDS TICKET....
Amanda Marcotte: Feminists: Not really stupid
Pam Spaulding: Mike Signorile tries to bore into the 'if not Hillary, I'm voting McCain' logic
I understand. I followed and supported Edwards for 10 years (his 1998 Senate race, 2004 and 2008 Presidential races). I had plenty of time to come to terms with things I did not like, e.g., votes I disagreed with, etc. I also spent a lot of time and effort on oppo research - I know better than most what Obama or Clinton did or said that I did not like. And it takes time to shift - when Edwards bowed out of the race, many Edwardsians suggested he go all the way to the convention and be a "kingmaker" and stuff like that. Weeks later, we all supported either Obama or Clinton (without the emotional zeal of their early supporters) and voted appropriately in the primaries. After a few more weeks, Hillary's supporters will come around as well. Obama is our nominee, and doing anything to help usher in the third Bush term is foolish, and Clinton supporters know it, or will understand it by November once they take a better look at the monster running on the GOP ticket.
- Log in to post comments
Of course they will!
http://physioprof.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/note-to-democrats-calm-the-f…
Frankly, I think it's articles like this that illustrate why, despite it being advertised as the "oldest" modern republic/democracy, politics in the US is still highly immature. The "monster on the GOP ticket" is the typical type of mud-slinging that elsewhere in the world is chiefly practiced by the extremist fringe. As a European, I never considered Bush a "monster", but rather the incarnation of everything that's immature about US politics: The lack of concern for any actual qualifications and the emphasis on attitude and emotional vaporware. Unfortunately, Obama with his diffuse promise of "change" has campaigned on pretty much the same trail. After the disaster in Iraq, one would have thought that the US electorate would have learned that "change" for its own sake can lead to the assumption that things couldn't get any worse to be proven wrong. "Change" doesn't necessarily mean change for the better.
Please, you'd do everyone -most of all yourself- a favor by stopping to demonize a competing candidate, by stopping to dig for skeletons in the closet of other candidates' private lives. They're competing for the votes of the people, they have different ideas and different priorities, and in some cases, these are disastrous. But they could act on these because they were elected, and one should ask who the monster is: If someone is a raving, murderous lunatic, isn't the truly sadistic monster the people who give him a gun?
I have had enough time to study the GOP and yes, they are monsters. The Broderism of centrism is the last-ditch effort at framing the Republicans as legitimate political party and human beings.
Coturnix is absolutely correct, the GOP are monsters. If being raised by liberal parents and spending my graduate school years under a Republican administration weren't enough to convince me of that, then living in another country for three years was. Nothing like a good ol' smack in the gob with "this is what you Americans look like to us", even in a country (the UK) that is usually an ally of the US and its policies.
In a faculty meeting almost eight years ago now, as a new hire in my current position, I made a snarky comment and snorted with disgust when the topic of Bush II-as-Next-President was mentioned in a positive manner. WTF did they think was going to happen with that? I got a lot of flak for that remark, and remain painted/tainted as a godless liberal (which is like a swear word around here). But look where we are now...as one of the ladies on "How Clean is Your House?" would say: [Scots accent] loo' a' the state o' this country![/Scots accent].
Clearly there wasn't enough snark in my comment, and insufficient disgust in my snort.
@Barn Owl
If you think that "snark" and "disgust" are characteristics you associate with particularly rational behavior...
Frankly, you are the spitting image of "this is what you Americans look like to us" and if you don't realize that your rethorics are a spitting image of those of Dubya, I really can't help you.
"You're either with us or against us" and in the latter case, you're the embodiment of all that is evil...
Sorry, but sane politics doesn't look like that. Like it or not.
Sane politics has left the GOP a couple of decades ago. Everything they stand for is dangerous for the country and the planet. The only rational response is a big pushback with all of our resources. The GOP should lose a status as a respectable political party, should lose any and all political power and should be scorned and ridiculed until they either a) shape up, or b) are replaced with another party that makes some sense.
Frankly, you are the spitting image of "this is what you Americans look like to us" and if you don't realize that your rethorics are a spitting image of those of Dubya, I really can't help you.
Why in the world would you assume that I needed or wanted your "help"? Help with what? "I really can't help you" as a response in a comments section has to be one of the dumbest and most arrogant internet memes going.
IMO, expressions of snark and disgust are completely appropriate and rational, given the current state of this country. It's disgusting, the amount of overt racism and sexism that has been displayed during the primaries. It's disgusting that the Bush administration continues to lie to the citizens of this country, and to send young people off to be maimed and killed in a senseless war.