Daily Archives: January 23, 2007

Dems ’08 – That Stinking, Sinking Feeling

crossposted at Five Before Chaos.

I’m still recovering from the ’06 election, and it seems like ’08 has begun. Anyone else have that sinking feeling that we’re screwed?

My political life is full of memories of mediocrity… the first president I can remember was Gerald Ford, if that’s any indication. And even as a preteen and teenager, I remember the foul stench of inadequacy that came with the names… Mondale, Dukkakis, and more recently, Kerry. And much of the bad feelings often stemmed from ‘electability’, the actual chance of winning, regardless of the positions. And with the current crop of Dem candidates, my visceral reaction is, of course, framed in ‘electability’: ‘America isn’t ready for a black/woman/Latino President.’ ‘What the hell are Biden/Dodd smoking?’, etc.

But I’m slowly realizing that that is not the most productive way. Sure, when you’re backing a single digit candidate, like I did with Nader in ’96, it might be worth considering. But by and large, when we soley focus on electability, we end up with the unelectable crap we’ve had to deal with, who end up not getting elected, anyways.

We need to focus much more on positions and actions, not personalities. I’m going to use our two alleged ‘frontrunners’ for examples.

Sure, it’s great that a strong, confident woman such as Hilary is running. But wouldn’t it be nice if some a strong, confident progressive woman were running instead? We hear all of this bullshit about ‘frontrunner’ Hillary, yet for the life of me, I can’t think of a single, compelling reason to vote for her and  Republican-lite positions. Sure, the wingers love to frame her as extremely liberal, but I’ll be damned if I see ANY evidence of that. Her Senate career so far has been one of convenience, changing with the wind, appeasing the right wingers, and no sense of real conviction about anything. I never understood the Hillary-haters, but I’m even more baffled by the Hillary-lovers. No thanks.

The Obama thing bothers me as well, even moreso now that it seems like some of my liberal VT blog-brethren have gotten on the bandwagon. Sure, I understand the charisma. I would venture to say it’s the only reason that people put JFK and Reagan in the upper-tier of presidents… it’s not like their positions were all that great. Obama is a fresh face, and his multiracial roots are in many ways emblematic of our modern America. He’s smart, articulate and handsome. But here’s the million dollar question.. what qualifies him to be president, and more importantly (and I do not ask this in jest), what positions has he taken that would make a progressive/lefty vote for him?  His support of free-trade? That he thought the Repubs were right on welfare reform? Or should we just support him on the inspirational rhetoric alone?

Sure, Obama does exhude a very positive vibe. That’s great.I know a lot of ‘positive vibe’ peopele in VT, too, but I sure don’t want them running anything. He’s a nice guy. I don’t want him to be president. It’s great that he reaches out to Americans of all stripes, but ya’ know what? Some of them are just wrong, and we’ve accommodated them long enough. The politics of the ‘mushy middle’ and the ever-increasingly-irrelevant DLC have run their course, have let the GOP get away with numerous atrocities at home and abroad, and have made the word ‘liberal’ a dirty one. We deserve better.

Maybe John Edwards? Who knows, his populism seems a bit more genuine. Maybe Gore will throw his hat into the ring? We need a real politics of substance, not style, not rhetoric. Remember, Bush was the candidate more people wanted to ‘have a beer with’. How’s that beer tasting now? And don’t even get me started on the latest rumor that a Clinton/Obama ticket is a possibility. My stomach can only take so much.

Granted, as bad as our choices are on the left, the GOP has it even worse right now…Guiliani, who won’t go anywhere with the knuckle-dragging GOP red-state base, McCain, whose actions over the last year have completely demolished his ‘straight-talk’ image now has the anchor of Bush attached firmly to his genitals, Brownback, who won’t go anywhere OUTSIDE of the knuckle-dragging Jesus-is-coming-in-2007 base, Romney… what the hell is that guy’s deal… and so on. So yes, it’s just one small thing to take comfort in as the GOP continues down its path into the political wilderness for hopefully another generation. But, schadenfreude aside, that doesn’t matter.

What does matter is preventing another backslide like this country has had for the last 25-or-so years. And if we keep thinking that people like Hillary and Obama are the best we can do, we’re not going to move forward. WE deserve better. Demand better.

THE FIRST VERMONT PRESIDENTIAL STRAW POLL (for links to the candidates exploratory committees, refer to the diary on the right-hand column)!!! If the 2008 Vermont Democratic Presidential Primary were

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

That Shining City on the Hill?

Karen Hughes is Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. According to the Washington Post, ” In plain English, her job is to fight anti-Americanism, promote American culture…”

So how’s that going for you, Karen? According to today’s Washington Post…

“LONDON, Jan. 23 — Global opinion of U.S. foreign policy has sharply deteriorated in the past two years, according to a BBC poll released on the eve of President Bush’s annual State of the Union address.

Nearly three-quarters of those polled in 25 countries disapprove of U.S. policies toward Iraq, and more than two-thirds said the U.S. military presence in the Middle East does more harm than good. Nearly half of those polled in Europe, Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East said the United States is now playing a mainly negative role in the world.”

It’s hard to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. But if that’s your job and you fail, it’s time to resign or get fired.