January 22, 2008

Thought for the Day

I said a good few things during the 2003-2004 primary season that I still sometimes wish I could take back. But I can't. Good thing for me that most people were eventually willing to overlook that and go on or reconcile.

I don't want any Obama supporters called cultists here, I don't want Edwards supporters lambasted for throwing the election, and I don't want my integrity questioned for deciding to support Clinton.

Hopefully, after this is all over, there will be some drinks bought all around and a cheer raised by all and sundry for the Democratic nominee. Whom I trust will not actually be Satan, even if they're maddening from time to time.

Posted by natasha at January 22, 2008 10:41 AM | Random Mumblings | Technorati links |
Comments

Hear, hear, testify and all that.

I'd say there are legitimate reasons to have preferences for any of the top three, and though I find Kucinich kind of unrealistic and irritating, he's at least willing to criticize the military-industrial complex in a way that the leading candidates can't or won't do.

Posted by: Rob at January 22, 2008 11:49 AM



Although I have long been and am still a fervent Edwards supporter, I look forward to cheering the victory of the Democratic nominee, whoever of the candidates it turns out to be.





I also look forward to applauding:

- the end of President G.W. Bush's term in office, and the inauguration of a Democrat.

- the beginning of the end of Bush/Cheney policies in Iraq and Afghanistan

- a government willing to spend actual money to support the troops we put in harm's way

- a 5-vote Democratic majority in the Senate that does not rely on Joe Lieberman.

- a much larger and more progressive Democratic majority in the House of Representatives.

- appointment of the next Supreme Court justice by a Democratic President

- the end of the musn't-mention-abortion and musn't-promote-condoms "gag rules" in international reproductive-health aid.

- the end of abstinence-only "sex education" in the US

- the end of Bush/Cheney's exploit-the-Earth-first environmental policies, and the beginnings of a return to sanity on issues from wetlands and clean water and air to climate changes.

- the end of Bush/Cheney's gag-the-messenger approach to science and other factual information that works against Republican political messaging.

- an end to the over politicization of executive agencies, from DOJ to FEMA to public broadcasting.

- I could go on for pages.



Brighter days ahead if only we keep on keeping on.





Posted by: joel hanes at January 22, 2008 04:08 PM

Obama cartoon

Posted by: ccoaler at January 22, 2008 06:30 PM

Joel:

I'm not at all convinced that we'll see most of those things after the coming election.

The Democratic party has lost much of it's soul and gumption. While I'll certainly be voting blue come November and doing so in the sincerest hopes that we will see exactly what you describe, I don't actually foresee it unfolding that way. Sadly, that's just the nature of politics.

What bothers me even more is the way center and left America have come to view the end of Republican party dominance in January of '09 as a near certainty. It is not and we cannot lull ourselves into thinking that it is lest we get lazy. I remember very clearly in August and September of '04, lots of liberals had already taken to referring to W in the past tense only to be made fools of and to then watch the country suffer for another four years.

There's still a year to go and a lot to be done.

Posted by: Thomas at January 23, 2008 01:32 AM

Thoreau :

I agree that the things I list will not happen if they require acts of principled courage on the part of Democrats. Also, I believe that the Republicans currently in power are capable of almost anything in their desperation.

Fortunately, circumstances are conspiring :

- the economy is in the worst death-spiral since 1929, and the Repubs will get the blame this time.

- women are going to vote for Sen. Clinton in the general election.

- the Republican party's stalwart culture-war partisans have finally awakened enough to realize that they've been used, and are rallying behind the unelectably-God-smitten Huckabee. Their rage and disappointment when he is not the nominee will deprive the GOP of its shock troops.

So although 2008 looks like a very dark year,
there's this tradition that it's always darkest before the dawn, and this time I think it's apposite.

Posted by: joel hanes at January 23, 2008 07:11 AM

I don't know how one misreads "Thomas" as "Thoreau", but I appear to have done so. Sorry.

Posted by: joel hanes at January 23, 2008 08:06 AM

Excellent point in this article!

Personally, I am an enthusiastic supporter of John Edwards. However, whomever the democratic nominee is among the top three, I will have no hesitency in whole-heartedly supporting them.

The debate, now, is really "who, among three strong contenders, should we nominate." There are definite differences an where I'd rate each, on a scale of 1 - 10. But, truth be told, any of them are, at a minimum, acceptable.

The catastrophic stench of the Bush years still surrounds us -- let's not forget "order of magnitude" when judging relative acceptability. The differences between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton can be measured 1 - 10. The difference between ANY of them and ANY Republican are 1 - 1,000,000 or more!

Posted by: Cathexis at January 23, 2008 10:47 AM

I support all of the Democratic candidates. I am only a supporter now of John Edwards because he would run much better in battleground and red states. He also has more progressive positions among all three candidates who are all asking us to judge them by their words now and not their actions in the past.

Posted by: Gary Denton at January 23, 2008 01:00 PM