I Prefer "Hillary's Way" to the Highway, If John McCain is Going to Be in the Driver's Seat

mathpol
"Why this is the end for the Clintons" is the title of a post by Dave Winer in today's "Huffington Post", in which he discusses the fall-out from the release of their tax returns, which shows they made $109million over the past seven years. He argues that people's knowledge of the wealth they have accumulated will further sink Hillary's campaign..

My reaction to this is that he is missing the forest for the trees. Being president isn't about making money. It's about leading the country. And look where George W. Bush has led us. Hillary may make things up, but she is clearly grounded in reality, unlike our current president. And she can beat McCain, whereas Obama cannot. Obama's association with the Reverend Wright is too toxic for many swing voters in battleground states to swallow. He showed incredibly poor judgment in thinking he could stay in Wright's church and also run for president. He has let his supporters down, and I have been one of them. If anyone should quit the race, it is him and not Hillary.

This presidential election is too important for the Democrats to lose. A "President McCain" would be a disaster. So what if Hillary is unpopular with a lot of people? That didn't disqualify Nixon. Neither did being "tricky", as long as the tricks were being played on the other party. Unfortunately, the Clintons are now trying to strong-arm delegates into voting for Hillary. I don't relish the return of this "dysfunctional duo" to the White House any more than anyone else does, but all of their excesses pale in comparison to what has transpired during the Bush-Cheney regime, and in many areas, especially the war in Iraq, McCain will not change the course.

I know, it's "Hillary's way or the highway", but if McCain is going to be in the driver's seat, I'll stick with Hillary.

A recent article in the Chicago Tribune, "Factor military duty into criticism", highlights Jeremiah Wright's military record as a marine and a navy corpsman.

Look, I don't care if Wright was one of those lifting the flag at Iwo Jima, it's not relevant to the current situation. Black Americans are and have been patriotic Americans; they have served with pride and honor in the armed forces, even when the latter were segregated. Wright's military service is to his credit, just as are all the good works his church has done. However, this does not offset the fact that "liberation theology", which he preaches, is in some ways closer to Louis Farrakhan than it is to, say, Jesse Jackson. And then there are Wright's incendiary statements. There is a recent column by George Packer and an article by Kelefa Sanneh in "The New Yorker" that deal with these issues.

Fine, so Barack Obama attended Wright's church for 20 years and wasn't taken in by any of this. I believe him but, unfortunately, I'm not the one who needs to be convinced. As of now, it looks like he will win the nomination, and if he does I hope that I am wrong and that he will prevail in the general election.

Published by mathpol

retired math professor. longtime political junkie. campaigned for Henry Wallace for President at age of seven.  View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Shamontiel5/7/2008

    Here's my issue: If we're going to hold reverends accountable for presidential elections, then shouldn't we be eyeing McCain too? McCain's friend, late Rev. Jerry Falwell, who said 9/11 was retribution from God, and Rev. John Hagee who said the Catholic Church "thirsted for the blood of the Jewish people" thoughout its history and that Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans to prevent a gay pride march? Do Obama naysayers hate him for his disrespect for homosexuality and translationof September 11th too? And just an FYI, if you want to find out more about why Rev. Wright may have a point about HIV/AIDS being a manmade disease, check out this six-part YouTube video set: http://www.youtube.com/v/Ml7q6iMwqLY&hl=en

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.