Going The Distance

I'm not a distance runner, but I know a few things about endurance. And, I'm pretty sure everyone knows the first rule of competing in a long race: Pace Yourself! You might have a lot of energy in the beginning, you might think that adrenaline can carry you, but when you get halfway there and the novelty has worn off, what is going to make you push on? Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I did not pace myself for this race. And I know I'm not the only one.

Now, I like to consider myself a die hard politico, but I'm starting to rethink that assessment. In my defense, I had a lot going on in my personal life and with my job, but don't we all? Maybe it was the six week break in which we only heard about Reverend Wright, "guns and bitter", and learned new and different ways Hillary can fudge the math to make it work for her. Those six weeks were the longest of my political life. Nothing changed, but you would have thought that people were battling it out in the polls every night. The talking heads said the same things over and over and over. Luckily, I haven't had a TV for the past seven weeks or so and I've been spared the worst of it (on the flip side, I miss KO like crazy).

And then the races started again. Pennsylvania and Clinton's on the upswing, North Carolina and Indiana put Obama back on top, but can he win the racists and rednecks? (Note: not a particular state, but maybe a particular demographic). And still, nothing's changed. I'm starting to envy the campaign limits of Britain and France.

I think the biggest problem in this campaign is the information itself. Well, not the facts, but the 24-hour news cycle. Or more precisely, the 30 minute news cycle. I had MSNBC on today for about five hours, and except for the Obama speech, the other four hours were the same 20-30 minutes of news rehashed over and over. Enough already! If there's no news, don't pretend that there is. It just makes the TV stations look like morons (or they already are and it's showing) and it frustrates the crap out of Americans. Or, even better, report on the rest of the world. Americans are, for the most part, largely ignorant of the geography of anything past North America. Let's branch out and see what's going on with the other 5.7 billion people on this planet. Oh, that's depressing? Poverty, genocide, and famine? Better turn back to Clinton and Obama.

But, if I could thank one person for making me come back day after day, I'd have to thank John McCain. Almost more than I want a Democrat to win, I want John McCain to lose. I want him to lose embarrassingly. I want him and the rest of his Republican neo-con liars to go down in flames at the hands of 'We the People." I want Americans to stand up and say "Hell no I'm not voting for a lying, hypocritical, old fool who doesn't know crap about the economy and tries to pass off a corporate health care plan under which even he wouldn't be covered! Hell no I'm not voting for a man that didn't vote for Bush but now kisses his ass daily! Hell no I'm not voting for more of the same failed policies! But, mostly, I'm not voting for you because I do actually love America, and not just those with money. Hell no John McCain!"

So, thank you John McCain for reminding me every day of what we're fighting for in this election. I may not have paced myself, but you are the wind on my back, pushing me to victory. We are running away from your failed policies and towards One America!

You Can't Teach An Old Dog New Tricks

When we were younger, there was no such thing as “too much of a good thing.” How could we have too much candy or ice cream? But, as we grew older, we realized that even the good things in life can backfire, and that we must try to achieve balance. We balance the good with the bad and the mundane. If we don’t, we loose sight what makes the good valuable. This election has often come to the question of experience and whose has the most and/or the best. And for me, and many other voters, it’s not the size of the experience, but the quality, that counts.

John McCain is a Cold Warrior. He came of age in a militaristic time and he was a POW in a hot war of cold war principles. He was raised to believe in idea that there are only two sides to any issues; the US versus the Soviet Union, Democracy or Communism, War or peace. This is his fatal flaw. He is simply not equipped to deal with the modern world. He has not honed his skills in discerning shades of gray, and the geopolitical situation today is anything but clearly defined. He will constantly fail, as he has already begun to do, when he tries to dilute complex issues into two sides.

I overheard a political advisor on the Bill-O circus the other day (don’t think I make a habit of watching that clown show) say that all McCain has to do to make Obama look weak on Iraq is hold his “stay the course” stance. The advisor stated that when Obama tries to explain his position, he will appear to “flip flop.” I vehemently disagree with this position (but, I encourage McCain to keep it). The longer that McCain sticks to the black and white situation, the more people will realize that he’s not equipped to deal with the complex issues facing the next president. Just as Bush has gooned everything up because of his refusal to address multi-faceted situations, McCain will be a monumental failure when he continues that policy.

And for the past two days, we’ve been shown what “experience” can give us. Obama speaks the truth about people’s opinions of Washington and points out wedge issues for what they are, and then the “experienced” politicians try to jump in and tell us that we don’t feel bitter, that we’re being condescended towards. If anything, it is condescending to tell us how we feel. If their experience has taught them anything, they would be listening to us, reading our letters and realizing that we are bitter. We don’t want to hear a pretty picture of how they will make it all better. We want someone who is willing to address the issues truthfully.

Because the world is complex, we need a president who is willing to face that reality head on (hell, we need a president who’s willing to face reality head on). No more of this doctored intelligence crap or the politicizing of every issue. We need a leader who has the mental agility to absorb many points of view while keeping the best interest of America, not his checking account, in mind.

So, McCain especially, but increasingly Clinton, have failed my experience test. Too often they have shown themselves to be entrenched in the past, stuck in their old ways. And, all I can see is that their experience will not move us forward. Their experience is only good for how things used to be, not what they are or what they will be. They have not shown themselves to be open to the change we need. McCain and Clinton are the old dogs, and right now, we need some new tricks.

WTF, Hillary?

Ok Hillary, we all know you want to be president. You want to be president really, really bad. But, don’t you think it’s gone just a little too far? I do. But, I just want to let you know, before I get started on this, that if you win the nomination, I’ll still vote for you. It will be like this post never happened.

In the beginning, you were doing so well. Personable, composed, nice. Ok, well maybe nice isn’t the word I’m looking for. Maybe mature or reasonable is more like it. Anyways, the point is, you seemed like a good candidate, like someone who was really about change and a turning over a new leaf. I even wrote an entry for you about why it would be good for America if you were president. I mean, even though I was an Edwards supporter, I was urging people in your direction, AND I always made a point to call you Clinton (calling women by their first names and men by their last is a common occurrence that I believes makes people take women less seriously).

Lately, though, I’m less than thrilled. What’s going on? People are calling you a “monster.” That’s pretty serious. Bush might be a monster; Cheney and Rove definitely are definitely monsters. But, you? This isn’t what we need. Remember the whole “change” and “healing” and “uniting” thing that we had going on? Thought so…

I can imagine that it would be hard to watch this dream slip away. Actually, no I can’t. This is really big! And, you have great policies. Ok, your policies are, for the most part, more progressive than your opponents. So, great might have been strong, good is sufficient. Definitely better than what we’ve got now.

Then things started to turn, I’d say around South Carolina. That’s when the “surrogates” started to come out. First it was Bill (“the first African American president”). I’ll be honest, the name-calling drew some criticism. And, it turned some people off. But it didn’t stop. And, I think we’ve gotten to a fever pitch here with the negative ads and negative speeches. Ok, you aren’t the only one doing it, but I think you started it. So, it’s time for you to end it. The whole “milking the cow” thing was way too much (and you know it. What did that even mean?).

The best thing about this primary was the fact that we had narrowed the field to two great candidates who could possibly work together in the future? Just so you know, you’ve totally ruined that. People are very drawn to a message of hope, change and doing things differently. You’ve been showing that you’re not so serious about this. I know, you’ve got experience, which I still haven’t figured out exactly how to measure. I’m not so convinced that your experience, is all that we need. We need the people to be mobilized, to care, to want to participate in politics. Obama is getting this done. He’s drawn new people and independents to the party (Bush and company have done a great job pushing people away, stepping on their heads, stabbing them in the back, etc.).

So, this will be my message to you. I’m sure you’re familiar with the saying “fail boldly.” Well, mine is a little different: Fail gracefully. If it does come to that, in April, June or August, please, put the good of the nation over your own desires. Remember that no good will can come of this. All these things that have been said cannot be stricken from the record. They are fair game in the general election. So, think carefully before that next negative statement comes out. If you want to be the leader, start right now. Get back to your original message; give us that dignity that we crave. That’s where you came from, and it was working, so get back to what works. Please.

What We're Fighting For

I know that the debate of Clinton or Obama is occupying people's minds, but I thought we could use a reminder of what we're fighting for. Set to the song Fighter by Christina Aguilera, a brief summary of the past seven years. Enjoy!

How The Mighty Are Falling

Has it really come to this? Is the Democratic Party, aided by the mainstream media, going to implode before the general election? Why have we let ourselves get caught up this media frenzy? Honestly, I have mostly ignored the Clinton/Obama fray. In part, it has to do with the fact that I am an Edwards supporter. I don’t make a point of reading anything that these candidates do or say that is outside of the scope of the issues. But, more importantly, I believe that people should not let themselves get drawn down into this media frenzy. It is petty and it does not add to the election process. It actually detracts from the professionalism and electability of the Democratic Party in the general election and it needs to stop. In today’s polls, McCain is leading Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. This is not where we need to be, and it’s all of our faults.

Why are people so unwilling to compromise? Specifically, Obama supporters. It has been shown that likely Hillary Clinton voters would vote for Obama, but the reverse is not true. Why? This idea is absurd and irritating, and it has a hint of reverse racism to it. Many of the Clinton detractors use extremely offensive and racist language when describing her. Where were these protests when she was First Lady and Bill was President? When you look at the three remaining Democratic candidates, you will see that not much separates their positions. When you look at the way our government is supposed to work, you will see that a President cannot single handedly run this country (note that I said “supposed to”). So then, what we need is a candidate who will direct Congress, lead the country, and act diplomatically abroad. All of the Democratic candidates are capable of fulfilling this role. The personal preference is in the details, and as we all know, details are subject to change.

Why are African Americans so firm in the idea of “Obama or bust”? There seems to be some sort of idea that Obama is entitled to the nomination because he is black, or at least this is how I interpret their comments. I have a hard time believing that people who are so mobilized to vote in the primary would just abandon the general election. I have a hard time believing that people would be so selfish in such an important election. Correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t the Republicans done more that enough damage in the past seven years? How could a supporter of Obama believe that a vote for a Republican, or no vote at all, would be better for America?

Will John Edwards be the beneficiary of this bickering? It’s interesting that for the first time, a white male is at a disadvantage in an election. The media frenzy surrounds the successful minority candidates, but it also drags them down. As Clinton and Obama continue to bicker, Edwards is gaining independent and crossover support, simply because he looks increasingly like the only adult in the room. And it has nothing to do with looks. It has everything to do with attitude. Of course, having the strong message doesn’t hurt. We need a president with attitude to stand up to special interests and those that have systematically driven this country further right.

So here’s my bottom line: This race is about restoring America. It is about Iraq, the economy, education, protecting the Constitution and our personal rights. It is not about race or gender. Unfortunately, some people just can’t let that go. They continue to bring up these issues and perpetuate racism and sexism. To me, the white male candidate is the best not just because he has the best ideas, but because he has risen above the despicable bickering. And to all those that continue to sling mud in the form of racism and sexism: “Stop. It makes you look bad.”

In America Anyone Can Be President. Almost...

Let’s take a look at countries that currently have elected female leaders: Ireland, New Zealand, The Philippines, Mozambique, Germany, Liberia, Chile, Switzerland, Georgia, Argentina, Ukraine and India. The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Canada and Denmark all have female monarchs.

Of the world's 10 most populous nations, six have not had a woman as head of government or state in the modern era. They are the United States, Brazil, China, Japan, Nigeria, and Russia

It is an embarrassment to America that we have not progressed enough as a democracy to elect a female President. We are just now electing women to congressional and gubernatorial seats, yet we demand that Iraq reserve and elect women to leadership positions. And in a greater percentage than they are elected in this country. Many countries that have female leaders have been democratic for decades, not centuries, yet they have seen that it’s not about gender, it’s about ability. This country needs to dust off its tired stereotypes and step into the modern era.

I’m no angry feminist, but I do see an obvious disparity in what we say our political system can do versus what we actually do with our political system. Nor am I saying that I would vote for Hillary solely because she is a woman, but I do take offense to the obvious double standard that she is being held to.

Looking at the numbers, men are the largest group of Hillary detractors. Yet outwardly they say that they would vote for a female candidate. It just won’t be Hillary. And then they proceed to list bogus “reasons” as to why she wouldn’t be a good President. I’m going to take some typical statements and debunk them (or at least give my thoughts on how people are making excuses).

1) Hillary doesn’t give straight answers.

Um, ok. This is a cop-out. First, we are talking about politics. There are no straight answers. Issues are more complex than yes or no (and if you believe that things are just black and white, you probably still think Saddam had WMDs hidden throughout the desert). Second, no politician wants to make a statement that they believe will be taken out of context and used against them, which people are more than wont to do in Hillary’s case.

Bush has been much less honest than any democratic candidate ever has. And this administration has continued to use lies and half-truths to perpetuate the war in Iraq, give tax breaks to the rich while claiming that they are helping the average American family, and to perpetuate their own conservative agenda.

2) Hillary doesn’t have enough experience.

Considering that she’s the only candidate who has lived in the White House, I would say that she knows more about what it takes to be President than any of the people running. Being the President is about being a diplomat. It’s not about how much legislation someone has written or how someone has led a state. Her experience as First Lady has given her inside knowledge about what the President truly does. She is more than prepared to be the President lead America, both nationally and internationally. Besides, with Bill as First Husband, she’ll essentially have the crib notes for “How to be President in Every Situation.”

3) Hillary isn’t a Uniter

Well, considering that about half the country is red and the other half is blue, no candidate is going to be a uniter. What Hillary does have are mainstream, progressive views. The leading Republican candidates are a Mormon and a Baptist minister, neither of whom have uniting views. Neither has proven an ability to appeal to a large and diverse demographic. The person that is going to win the vote is the person that is moderate, but don’t expect any uniting to happen.

4) She doesn’t know what it take to be Commander in Chief

This is a big problem for men because they see the military is a man’s realm. But, they had no problem electing Bush and Cheney, who not only had no military experience between them, but they both actively sought ways out of the draft. Only one of the candidates running today has any military experience, so the argument that Hillary is somehow “lacking” in the military arena is totally bunk. The Joint Chiefs of Staff exist for a reason, and Hillary is more than willing to listen to their recommendations (we know all too well what happens when Presidents decide not to listen to the professionals).


To everyone out there that is holding Hillary to a higher standard: get real. This is the 21st century and women have proven themselves capable of being in power. If men are scared of that fact, then they need to take some time for introspection to figure out why they are so scared. Look at the candidates for who they are and what they can do. Don’t make lame excuses about why a woman can’t do the job.