A Different Take on the Democratic Race
From the always thoughtfulThe Daily Brew mailing list.
I've always been a fan of Hillary, but I've never been a fan of her
campaign. From the comments section of her website that doesn't
allow anything but fawning praise to the planted questions at public
events, Hillary's Presidential run has all the spontaneity of the
changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace. It comes as no surprise to
me that the only real bump occurred when she went off script and cried
before New Hampshire. It was the only time she looked human. Too bad for Hillary fans that Mark Penn didn't notice.
Super Tuesday was supposed to end this race, but it turned out to be
just the first half, and it was fought to a tie. Yesterday Obama took
the opening kickoff of the second half and ran it back for a touchdown.
Obama is poised to repeat wins in Washington, Nebraska and Louisiana
with fresh victories in Virginia, Maryland and DC on February 12th, and
again in Hawaii and Wisconsin on February 19. It is easy to picture a
scenario where Hillary loses every primary for the whole month of
February, excepting the Super Tuesday contests. Once that kind of
momentum is established, it becomes awfully hard to break. Her last
chance will be on March 4 in Ohio and Texas.
The question then becomes is Hillary is willing to destroy the
Democratic village to save it? If Hillary Clinton was George Bush, and
Mark Penn was Karl Rove, there is no question that the dirtiest, below
the radar slime operation in history would be cranking up right now in
Dallas, Cincinnati, San Antonio, Columbus, Houston, and Cleveland.
Obama fans shouldn't kid themselves. If Mark Penn goes to work
targeting Hispanics in Texas and racist white Democrats in Ohio with
Rovian messaging, Hillary could stage a comeback. But Hillary fans
shouldn't kid themselves either. The only way Hillary is going to
make that kind of comeback is to rip the Democratic party in half.
I, for one, am increasingly having trouble working up the gumption to
care. As near as I can tell, neither Hillary nor Obama have pledged to
dismantle the Bush administration's growing police state. According
to Alternet, Cheney is building a shadow CIA in the private sector
called InfraGardâ that looks a whole lot like the East German
Stasi. It will form a nice compliment to the private mercenary army
they've built with Blackwater. Thanks to the Bush administration,
the private sector has government contracts to spy on Americans and
fight unnecessary wars of choice, all with complete immunity from the
judicial and/or democratic process. The only candidate I ever wanted
to vote for was the one that pledged to end all that, and to deliver
the members of the Bush administration to an international tribunal to
try them for the War Crimes, including torture. Sadly, that candidate
doesn't seem to exist.
Comments
now THERE'S an issue worth discussin'. problem is, i don't think anyone's told the candidates. the whole issue of iraq makes a very effective smokescreen. i'm sure there's a community of conspiracy theorists who think this arrangement is entirely intentional. and i can see why.
I'll give Mark Penn credit for not being as much of a dirtbag as Rove. But not that much credit. The Clintons got hammered--not just by the media, not just by some Clinton hate club--but by liberal Democrats for relatively light race baiting in SC. They would be crucified if they tried Rovian tactics in Ohio and Texas. And besides, who really thinks that Democratic whites and Hispanics will respond to that kind of politics in the way right-wing Southerners did in 2000 against McCain? There's a reason Rove didn't try to pull that stuff in New Hampshire.
It's true that neither of these Democrats have pledged to move strongly away from Bush's view of presidential power (they want to be president, after all!). Obama himself is hard to read. HRC, however, has a record that is firmly pro-executive power. She developed these views in the White House, and has stuck by them as a Senator. I doubt she likes torture and illegal wiretapping as much as Bush does, but by all indications she doesn't hate the former as much as McCain does. She's a pro-executive power Democrat, much like Truman, Kennedy, LBJ and Bill Clinton were. It's not all so horrible, but the upshot is that she's probably closer to Bush on these issues than Obama is.
The sad fact of the matter is that Bush's view of the executive will probably never be wholly undone by a Democratic president. The constitution, and human nautre, makes that very difficult. It has to come from Congress and the judiciary. Good luck with the judiciary. And Congress has, for some time, only been able to stand up for its rights and prerogatives on a partisan basis.
thanks for facilitating more thought provoking discussion, and providing a venue for intellectual discourse on a subject so often reduced to shrieking. having said that, i encourage you and your readers to reconsider the following attitude, one which we all feel at times:
"I, for one, am increasingly having trouble working up the gumption to care."
you have a computer. an internet connection. dinner. a bed and a roof, i presume. you have a voice. this is no time to entertain apathy. i hope you'll continue to resist cynicism and work for the world you want.
let's see to it that the white house and both houses of congress are in Dem hands, and then keep the pressure on until justice is done. things worth fighting for are not always easily achieved.
in closing here's an Obama endorsement from Habeas lawyers:
http://habeaslawyersforobama.blogspot.com/2008/01/habeas-lawyers-for-obama.html
amorphousblob: Thank you very much for linking to that endorsement by Habeas lawyers. I hadn't seen it before, I think I think it is highly relevant. Some here seem to be implying that Obama is all flowery rhetoric with no substance. These lawyers are emphasizing the opposite, that Obama worked diligently with them first hand on this critical issue.
This issue is, in my opinion, much more important than the credit card interest issue. I'd love to see any segment of the media take an interest in the Bush administration's building of police state powers. I'd also like to get Clinton and Obama on record concerning their intentions with respect to both Blackwater and Infragard. The privatization of the military and the intelligence community smacks of fascism as much as anything else going on - and most people seem apathetic.
Uhh...his name is Dennis Kucinich, but everyone decided that he was not electable, so he was ignored.
Could you post the link for the InfraGarda article on AlterNet?
I 100% agree with the last few lines of this article. Obama's already got me with his "religious people must provide proof that their policies are better, not the bible" stance, now if he would just talk about Habeus Corpus, Torture, Imperialism, etc etc...
Post a comment