Monday, February 25, 2008

Desperation is a tender trap.

I need to say something about Hillary Clinton. In the past, I have actually liked Hillary quite a bit. I always felt (and still feel) that she got an unfair rap as First Lady. People judged her without knowing her. And her comment about a "vast right-wing conspiracy" turned out, as history has shown, to be more or less correct. I think that she has done a good job as senator, acting as an advocate for families, etc.

But she's so gross lately. Her campaign is a disaster of hypocrisy and deceit. And desperation.

But yesterday, she just pissed me off. Here's what she said:




Mocking Barack Obama is one thing (a bad thing, but one thing). But these comments do not just mock Obama; they mock all of Obama's supporters. I take personal offense at this nonsense. She assumes that we have all been duped in some way by Barack's eloquence. But believe it or not, many of us are able to see that Barack has substance as well as style. These two traits are not mutually exclusive.

And her stupid, unwarranted attacks on Obama do nothing but give false ammo to McCain. "I'm honored to be sitting here with Barack Obama." Blah blah blah.

15 Comments:

At 11:30 AM, Blogger jb posited...

Amen, brother.

 
At 3:44 PM, Blogger P "N" K posited...

I especially liked the part about celestial choirs. That's a nice image.

 
At 6:14 PM, Blogger Pelk posited...

I agree and disagree with you.

Hillary is gross, no arguments here.

With the issue at hand, the elimination of special interests, Hillary does have a point that Barack's position is a little too euphoric and vague. It's understandable that he can't go into the nth detail about what he plans to do in a speech or debate, but he could at least go into some detail on his website, but this isn't the case:

"Close Special Interest Corporate Loopholes: Obama will level the playing field for all businesses by eliminating special-interest loopholes and deductions, such as those for the oil and gas industry."

Nothing in the way of a mechanism for this change or what specific loopholes he plans to eliminate. He's just going to get rid of all them without any problems.

Granted, Hillary pointing this out the way she did wasn't the greatest for her campaign or the Democratic Party, but at the very least she does have a point.

 
At 6:22 PM, Blogger CoachDub posited...

I know what you are saying, Adam, but then again, none of the three candidates have really offered specific plans for very much of anything in the primary season.

 
At 9:42 PM, Blogger Pelk posited...

it's a shame

 
At 12:16 AM, Blogger Jason posited...

It is a shame, indeed. Not to take Hillary's side, but coming from a campus full of Obama supporters, I am surprised almost daily by how many of his supporters know so little about his actual politics. "Change" is such a buzzword; he just needs to say it enough, and say it charismatically enough. I watch the Will.i.am "Yes We Can" video and hear "hope," "change," "yes we can." These are, at least to me, magic wands and celestial choirs. I hear just more promises, more lofty ideals, more politicking. And while I certainly know that the University of Minnesota is not exactly a representative sample, I, from my own personal experience, do find it hard to believe that Barack has pulled ahead primarily because of his stance on the issues or shown competence as opposed to his driving idealism and winning smile.

 
At 5:31 AM, Blogger CoachDub posited...

But when two candidates have more or less the same policies and politics, is there anything wrong with going with the one who inspires people, who gives people hope, who unites people across divisional lines? Is there anything wrong with wanting a president that makes people believe that the country could possibly be earn back our pride?

I agree that many who have jumped on the Obama wagon may not know much about his policies and politics, but that does not mean he does not have them. But this is not all of his supporters.

 
At 12:26 PM, Blogger P "N" K posited...

On that point Dub, I completely agree. I wouldn't vote for either Hillary or Obama given their politics, but in a choice between simply the two of them and no conservative candidate, yeah, he seems much more appealing.

As far as his supporters not knowing his actual policies and whatnot, I think Jason, Pelk, and I are getting a fairly biased view. Obama obviously gains huge support from voters who skew younger like us, and I'm not surprised at all that so many college kids don't know much. No one bothers to really pay attention, because let's face it, unless you're already of a certain mindset, politics can easily become both boring and rife with cynicsm. I grew up in a household with parents who paid a lot of attention to politics and routinely asked me what I thought, so it's pretty much a habit. That's not often the case.

 
At 2:24 PM, Blogger John posited...

I'd rather have an honest, charming, genuine president who gets absolutely nothing accomplished because he is too idealistic than John McCain as president.

The end.

That doesn't mean I think that will be the case, however. I'm just saying.

 
At 4:58 PM, Blogger constant_k posited...

god

that fucking yellow jacket

 
At 4:59 PM, Blogger Jason posited...

I think that given the similarities between Obama's and Hillary's politics and policies, that pushing her own track record and experience (which definitely sways voters who care greatly about the issue to her side) over his optimism, inspiration, and never-ending call for "change" (which strongly influences voters who care about such issues to his side) is anything but a stupid tactic. Sure, she's a bit harsh (though of course, we ain't seen nothin yet) and a bit desperate (I would be too at this point), but I don't think anything she's done is really uncalled for, any more than all the run-of-the-mill empty promises and mudslinging that go along with today's political campaigns are uncalled for.

While not nearly as vehemently as John, I have tended to lean towards Obama over McCain. I think my biggest problem personally is that it is very easy to get emotionally caught up in the forward march of the inspirational and charismatic Barack Obama without taking into consideration his experience, politics, and general qualifications for the position. I find myself so willingly swept along like my contemporaries - that is, until I stop to look at what he actually stands for, and realize that he is, in fact, too good to be true. He claims to unite people, and he has, sure, but he his is a politician, and his politics are not my own; and politics, more than inspiration or hope or this platitude of "change" we hear so much about, are what I look for in my politicians.

I'm not hatin' on hope. I'm not going to bat for Hillary. I'm just trying to take a rational approach where I see so many others going with the flow.

 
At 5:04 PM, Blogger Jason posited...

So maybe in pushing rationality over emotion in decision-making, I'm supporting the point of Hillary's diatribe; I do not, however, support her from a political perspective.

Just to clarify.

 
At 6:01 PM, Blogger P "N" K posited...

I just wonder why people tend to value so many other things instead of what positions politicians take. I'm sure they have their reasons, but I just don't get it. I'd rather a statue be in office that would be an advocate for the things I agree with than any charming personality who was politically opposite than me. Maybe I'm being too much of a grouch and too cynical or whatever, but I could (almost) care less about hope and great speeches if the person who delivers them is 170 degrees away from me on policy.

 
At 6:01 PM, Blogger P "N" K posited...

*from

 
At 7:41 PM, Blogger Pelk posited...

Well said, Max. That is quite the jacket.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home