ThePoliticalCat

A Blog devoted to progressive politics, environmental issues, LGBT issues, social justice, workers' rights, womens' rights, and, most importantly, Cats.

Saturday, March 22, 2008

2008 Elections: Character Counts


We might have mentioned that we're noticing more of our friends who were pro-Clinton (mind you, in our little enclave, we're mostly long-time Clinton supporters) are beginning to change their minds and move to Barack Obama. We too have joined the crowd. Mostly because the Clinton campaign has disillusioned us with her character and her husband's.

Here, for example, are comments from Bill Clinton made in Charlotte, North Carolina to members of the press:
"I think it would be a great thing if we had an election between two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interests of the country and people could actually ask themselves who is right on the issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics."
Two people? There are three running for election. Which two did you mean, Mr. Clinton?

It turns out that Hillary's husband was referring to Hillary and John McCain. So this is another sneaky sidewise assault on the patriotism and bona fides of Barack Obama, designed to feed the worst instincts of the mob. Why? Why sink into the gutter like this? Can't you attack his political positions? Tell us how his health care plan differs from your wife's? What his attitude is towards labour? Taxes? Women's rights? Anything factual?

Here, in contrast, is Senator Obama talking about Senator Clinton to the press:
"Senator Clinton is smart, she is capable and she is tenacious. She would be a vast improvement over the status quo... she’s gotten caught up in the conventional thinking in Washington. When I get that phone call at 3 in the morning, do what a good president should do, which is to get the facts, to talk with your advisers, to gather good intelligence and then to exercise good judgment. Senator Clinton, all too often I think, all too often over the last five years on foreign policy debates, has calibrated her responses based on politics instead of good judgment. That’s what happened on Iraq.

Now, here’s the condensed version of the difference on both domestic and foreign policy. It’s a question of leadership. I believe that it’s not enough just to change political parties. We have to change the culture, and part of changing the culture is recognizing that the special interests, the lobbyists, the insurance companies, the banks, the drug companies, HMO’s, they have come to dictate the agenda in Washington. The only way you break out of that so that ordinary people’s voices are heard is if you stop taking money from PACs and lobbyists like I have- she still does- and you recognize that they’re a problem- she doesn’t.

If you believe in transparency and accountability, which is why I passed the toughest ethics reform legislation since Watergate last year- this is not an issue she’s ever worked on because she doesn’t think it’s a priority- I passed laws to post on the internet a searchable database of every dollar of federal spending out there. Your tax money will continue to be wasted until you know when a "Bridge to Nowhere" is being built. She doesn’t believe in transparency and hasn’t even released her earmarks just like she hasn’t released her income tax returns. She doesn’t believe, I think, in bottom-up democracy, and if you don’t believe in that, then you’re not going to change Washington. You’ll tinker around the edges, but you’re not going to bring about the kind of changes the American people are desperate for. That’s why you should vote for Barack Obama."
This is what we want to hear. He's respectful towards Senator Clinton, but points out how he would be better for the job.

If he weren't respectful, we'd give up on him as a misogynistic bastard of an opportunistic politician. But he has handled the Ferraro issue and Clinton's character attacks so well and with such dignity that we are moving closer into his camp with each passing day.

Character counts, Senator Clinton, and President Clinton. For you to say what you're saying is unacceptable. Either tell us why Senator Clinton would be a better match for the job, or step down now. Personally, we're sick of this vicious bullshit. It doesn't sit well with us and we're sensing that it doesn't sit well with lots of other people too, Senator Clinton &mdash most importantly, the Party faithful and those apolitical types who rallied to support you when the rightwing smear machine funded by Mellon Scaife was all over you. If you're no different than them, why the hell should we support you?

Labels: , , , , , ,

Stumble It!

6 Comments:

At 12:48 PM, Blogger How Insane Is John McCain? said...

Great post!

 
At 7:14 AM, Blogger Connecticut Man1 said...

Someone over at ePluribus Media commented in a diary of mine that her campaign's rhetoric is is getting into Lieberman territory (not near exact words) and it was almost like she was preparing to set herself up for an independent run.

Knowing that she has no real chance of winning, her attacks have been well outside the realms of anyone interested in getting any Democratic candidate elected.

 
At 10:37 AM, Blogger ThePoliticalCat said...

Damn, CMan, I was just thinking that myself! I don't know if it's true, but she's certainly acting as if she can split the Democratic party in two and take her supporters with her.

An independent run won't help the Dems but it'll pretty much hand McCain the WH unless he has a stroke in the middle of the campaign.

 
At 1:37 PM, Blogger zoe said...

oh shit, the last two comments brought a subconscious thought to consciousness...shit shit shit. I have long felt she had an overdose of narcissism, but now I am beginning to believe there is a bit of sociopathy in the mix. makes me very very sad.

 
At 12:19 PM, Blogger ThePoliticalCat said...

Yesterday, I saw a photograph of her sitting down with Richard Mellon Scaife for a heart-to-heart. All along I've tried not to be negative about her, but I felt so betrayed. Remember when she told us there was a vast rightwing conspiracy against her husband and herself? I believed her. Mellon Scaife was the heart and soul of that conspiracy. He bankrolled it.

How could she sit down with the man who accused her of murder and other horrible crimes? Was it all a lie? I feel so cheated. Were we all played for suckers? We who stood up for her, and Bill?

 
At 12:23 PM, Blogger zoe said...

TPC:

Had a reaction of disbelief, and then anger when I saw the photo. Yes, I too believed the great right wing conspiracy against the Clintons --- but getting in bed with him now, simply to use him as a tool to smear BHO? This speaks directly to her character. (along with the inflation of her resume, and then sticking to the lie....) sad, sad, sad

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home