I’m done.
by Frederick
I’m on strike too. After this post your not likely to hear another word about Senators Clinton or Obama from me for awhile. Jane Hamsher puts her finger squarely on it:
Obama casts Wright and Ferraro as people whose evolution and politics have root in a different time. He shows both vision and leadership in this analysis. And those who would rather take the discussion into “candidate surrogate gotcha” are, I think, doing so at all our peril.
I watch the TV these days and I see that the image of the Democratic party is quickly morphing from the party of economic justice or the party that will get us out of Iraq into the party that wants to return to the identity politics wars of the 70s. Because the Democrats have largely sat back and been content to watch the Republicans self-destruct rather than step out in a leadership position on issues that could have positively defined them, they’re vulnerable to being cast thusly. It’s a big turn-off to most Americans that shrewd GOP political operatives and cooperative media have been quick to seize upon.
Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.
…and my my fellow non-Republicans, McCain is leading in the polls against both Hillary and Barack with Nader factored in. And Ralph Nader is a factor because of your inability to coalesce around a candidate that clearly speaks for and acts on the behalf of the people. Not “those people,” or “that segment” voting block.
Comments
I was done with the Democrats shortly after November 2006, when I realized that they weren’t going to stop the illegal and immoral activities of the Bush ADDministration. I was rallying around Kucinich this time, but realized the Democrats are just another cult of personality, like the Republicans, knee deep in Aipac money and no vision for any real change.
GO NADER!!!!!!!!!
Lew ‘gets it’. There are not two parties. “morphing from the party of economic justice” simple image peddling. There will be no economic justice while our money is built on a monopoly fiat system. Faith is running out and that is all that backs Federal Reserve Not-es. Those who depend on SS are in for very hard times.
GO RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!
Well, perhaps the utter destruction of the Democratic Party would be a good thing if out of it comes a REAL political party that actually represents The People and not corporations.
Hey, I can dream, can’t I?
Elton John is doing a fundraising concert for The Hillary.
That has to make a difference, if only by one level of Philadelphia Freedom shittiness.
Speaking of Philly Freedom: “…the only path to victory for Clinton is via coup by super delegate.”
Methinks they Don’t get it. Nader won’t save the troops lives. Neither will Ron Paul. Voting for Nader or Paul doesn’t mean less dead Iraqi children killed by American bombs.
Work for your third party panaceas if you will, but throwing away a vote while people are dying may just be the most irresponsible thing of all.
…and neither does voting for Barack or Hillary at this point. Maybe a Nader or Paul third party candidacy can change that.
I like how Obama’s speech today was about how the war needs to end and the nation needs to learn something from it about going to war based on ideology instead of fact. Then CNN followed that clip with Clinton’s speech in Detroit where she said that soldiers from Michigan have died in the war, and those from Mich. still fighting deserve a CinC who will bring them home, so that’s why it’s so urgent that the DNC seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida so soldiers from those states will get to pick her as the next president, or something. It seemed to me like one was talking about ending the war because it’s wrong while the other was using the war for cheap political gain.
Although, as someone else has already noted, if Obama is so genuinely interested in ending this war, why does the military need to increase in size? Will that new larger military be necessary for all of the new better smarter wars that Obama plans to rain down on all of the other countries in the world that happen to not be Iraq? Or will it be intended to help enforce the economic policies of his Chicago school advisers here? Looks like we’ll find out soon.