What Have You Done for Your Country Lately?

So here I sit after another haiatus of blogging.. and the election year is in full swing. I remember four years ago when Bush was up for reelection, and there were a lot of stickers and other advertising which said "ABB" - Anyone But Bush.

Well this year, although I haven't seen it yet, there has been a sentiment from quite a few people I've talked to which indicates an "ABC" attitude - Anyone But Clinton. She started off well out of the gate early, but Barack Obama whittled away the lead slowly and is now at the front of the Democratic party, heading for the nomination. In a few days Hillary will have her biggest battles in the next wave of primaries, and it is "make or break" for her now.

But herein lies the problem as I see it.. Whether a Republican or Democrat, just about everyone in the running still is some kind of "insider" who has had at least some experience at the national level. Even Obama with his term as one of Illinois' representatives, isn't a complete outsider when it comes to beltway politics. McCain has been around it seems forever, Clinton has had her term as senator and was exposed to the inner workings of the executive branch by being first lady (and it is my opinion she wore the pants during those eight years, since Bill seemed to have a problem keeping his on).

The youngest candidate out there is Obama. While everyone else espouses change, they're all still proving to be part of the "same ole gummint machine" - proven with Hillary's latest attacks against Barack with her "3am - who do you want to answer the red phone?" commercials. Attacking your opponent in such a manner - in more recent electoral contests - has almost unanimously backfired on the candidate lowering to such tactics; and to me they are a sign of a desparate person with nothing else to lose - and nothing of their own merit to stand on to prove they are truly the right candidate for the job.

Obama might not be the best man out there. Ron Paul has some radical ideas which a lot of people like, but not enough support to put him into the Oval office to attempt to effect the sweeping changes he proposes. But Obama has something no one else has really proven to possess - charisma. He has continually won people over just by being himself. And I haven't seen him waiver on his stances as the others have over the years. He is young; he represents the next generation to be entering the age of national and international politics.. the generation that has had the experience working and growing in today's changing world. He's tried to prove himself a good representative for the people in his area, and now is taking his experience and "can-do" attitude to the ultimate level - that of being the leader of our nation.

This is *my* generation. He's not that much older than I am, and he's done a lot with his 46 years and diverse background and upbringing, he has tried to do his best in representing the people who entrusted him to his various positions. No one is perfect, but he seems to at least understand that and embrace the differences of the people around him, learning and growing in the process so he might better represent - and govern - in the future.

Hillary's "a-bomb commercial" attack does raise the question about who we want answering the phone in the white house when it rings. After eight years of Bill, and his lack of effective deterrence against the terrorist attacks against the USS Stark, various embassies around the world, and the first attempt at the World Trade Center in New York City just after he took office, what are we supposed to expect from her? Had we been more zealous in our pursuit of those who did mastermind those attacks, would we have lost the World Trade Center in 2001? The only major offensives I recall Bill Clinton authorizing were air raids into Iraq's "no-fly zones" when he needed to draw attention away from his personal life and the questions surrounding Monica Lewinsky.

So who truly is the best person for the job at this point? McCain, a war "hero" and POW who seems to be just as gung-ho and volatile as Reagan was when he started in office. Clinton with her "vast" experience as first-lady and one-term senator from New York. Obama who has an equal level of "true" elected experience as Clinton. Or good ole Ralph Nader, who just threw his own hat into the ring as an independent once again.

For me, growing up in a conservative household and trying to live by traditional standards, after seeing the way the Republicans mucked up the last sixteen years I'm not inclined to "vote the party" anymore. In fact, although I am not much more in favor of the drastic levels of the left-wing politics in the Democratic Party, I have switched to that party at least for the upcoming primary. If for not other reason than voting for the least of the evils presented to us.

ABC - Anyone But Clinton.

Obama is young - one of the youngest candidates ever - and in my opinion has the best chance of truly incorporating change in our government as a representative of the "next generation" in politics. My generation. I don't agree with everything he stands for, but he at least seems to be the best prepared to go not just the next four years, but should be able to carry things into two full terms - provided he doesn't mess things up in the first one.

It is time for my generation to really stand up and be counted. For the next 20 years this should be OUR country and OUR world. We can evoke change and it is our duty as sentient beings to do what we can to accomplish the goals which we truly desire for ourselves, our country, and our planet. We have become too complacent, so much being handed to us over the years. It is time to put back into the country - as JFK said in his speech "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."

What have YOU done for your country lately?