A Left Turn FOR CLARK

It's a funny thought for me to settle on now, with a huge election test looming on Super Tuesday. But it's the one that has slowly been working it's way up from my sub conscious mind, and now that it's arrived I'm looking at it, and it's looking back at me. Over the last six months I have seen an extraordinary amount of very negative adjectives and names attached to Hillary Clinton on political discussion boards. Down right evil words used to describe her, with "unlikable" firmly lodged at the benign end of the available spectrum. But I am not finding her unlikable at all. I am seeing much to admire about Hillary instead.

It occurred to me, how would it effect me if that type of bitter derision and accusatory hatred was aimed toward me every day? And not just by those who I can understand may have good reason to be my enemy, but also by those whose goals and vision for America I too share. A whole lot worse than it has effected her was my very quick and certain answer for myself. And Hillary has been dealing with this, to greater and lesser extents daily for over 15 years. All because she long ago dedicated her life to making a positive difference in other people's lives.

Continue reading "I Think I Would Really Like Hillary Clinton If I Knew Her Personally" »

Hillary Clinton is now officially my presidential candidate. Though she is not my ideal candidate for President, frankly it is rare that “my ideal candidate” even runs for any office, let alone wins it. I thought long and hard about the Democratic choices still available for me to support for 2008, and after doing so I choose Hillary over any of them. I was greatly disappointed when Wes Clark did not run, I was greatly disappointed when Al Gore did not run, and I was disappointed that Russ Feingold didn’t run either.

None of those men still have a chance to become President in 2008 but Hillary Clinton does. My first team didn’t take the field this season but Hillary Clinton did. I believe she will run an excellent campaign against the Republicans if she becomes the Democrats nominee, and I think Hillary Clinton will make a good President for America when she takes office in January 2009. I do not hesitate to support her for President.

Continue reading "A Clear Vote for Hillary - Mine" »

Well me either and I’ll tell you my main reason. The U.S. Senate could vote to gather up every loose saber littering that chamber’s floor to lock safely in the attic and what this White House would hear are sabers being rattled while they were carted off. But I’ll tell you something I don’t like almost if not equally as much as Clinton’s Kyle – Lieberman vote. By and large I am upset by how anti-war grassroots have seized on Clinton’s vote to use as a primary season football at the expense of trying to lesson the risk of war with Iran.

Essentially the primary reaction of most anti-war grassroots activists to the passage of Kyle –Lieberman by the U. S. Senate has been to blast Clinton for her vote and use that vote to argue against her Presidential candidacy. I know I am over simplifying, but the most common line of attack seems to be that by voting for Kyle- Lieberman, Clinton gave political cover to Bush/Cheney that will make it easier for them to attack Iran while they still are in office. Let’s step back and look at that for a second. Maybe several LONG seconds.

Continue reading "So You Don’t Like Hillary’s Iran Vote?" »

After seeing Wes Clark speak twice in NYC yesterday, once on his own at a book signing, and later with Hillary Clinton at a fund raiser for her, it is becoming clearer to me how Clark's concern over stopping a war with Iran factors into his decision to endorse Hillary Clinton for President.

At the book signing Clark was asked, as a last question with time running out, if he thought the U.S. would bomb Iran, and he said "Yes". Clark focused his answer on what appeared to be most likely and why, he wasn't giving his personal views, though Clark repeated that he thought that bombing Iran was a "bad option." Clark pointed out that not only is it the stated policy of the Bush Administration that Iran must not be allowed to acquire weapons grade uranium, but he indicated that he personally talked to all of the current Democratic candidates about their views on this contengency, and they all essentially agreed with that bottom line (though it was not something that they embraced a chance to proclaim).

Clark then backed up and said actually that was the position of all the Democratic candidates with one or two possible exceptions - which he did not clarify further. I took that to indicate that all of the major candidates, minimally including Obama, Edwdards, and Clinton, were prepared to bomb Iran if need be to stop them from getting nukes. Kucinich most likely is one exception, and my guess is Gravel is the other that Clark is not sure about. Perhaps it is another Democrat, not Gravel, who is not clearly in that bomb Iran at the point of "A bomb making" camp, but I am confident Clark would not have started his comment with the word "all" if one of the likely nominees disagreed with that position.

Continue reading "Iran, the Democrats running for President, & Clark's Clinton Endorsement" »

Over the last four years I have come to appreciate that Wes Clark seems to have a sure sense as to where attacks on the chances for a Democratic Party victory are most likely to come from, and how he carefully pre-positions himself to protect whatever flank of our Party is most exposed and vulnerable to an attack that might deny us an important victory. There is no more important victory to secure for the Democratic Party now than the White House in 2008, because that victory is not just needed for a domestic and partisan political party, it is needed both for the health of our Democracy and for sanity in this world.

The visible danger that the Democratic Party faces in 2008 comes from all of the usual suspects, starting of course with the Republican Party but including a host of puppet masters and enablers, from powerful special interests to a rightist propaganda oriented mass media. Most Democrats know those enemies well enough, they are familiar foes; dangerous yes, but easily recognized and fairly straight forward to defend against. Sometimes we do well in that regard, sometimes not, but it is an unseen adversary that can ambush and thereby defeat our efforts to deny Republicans the White House in 2008.

That adversary hides in our own passion, in our own desire to right all that is wrong in our nation now. I am guilty of that passion though I do not view it as a crime. I make no apologies for fighting for what I believe in my heart is best for our nation. But passion denied frequently leads to bitterness, and for many of us in the activist base of the Democratic Party, passions flow in support of Democratic candidates for President far more progressive than Hillary Clinton will ever be in our eyes. Passion isn't the hidden adversary that will have to be overcome for Democrats to defeat the Republican nominee for President in 2008. It is a lack of passion for our most likely presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, that I fear may doom us.

Continue reading "I believe General Clark is walking point for the Democratic Party again" »