But I've got to say the image she most left me with is even closer to my heart. The social equality of women being equal to men...Picture this...the first Madam President Hillary Clinton with the future Madam President Coco Kinnell...that's the picture I see in my mind. That my daughters have the same opportunities and advancement that men in America have been traditionally granted.I also have to say to all supporters of any campaign... Yeah...I've heard the threats...she's a beltway insider...well you know what? I think of Bush and how he wasn't a Washington insider either, and how they claimed he was a uniter and would reached across the aisle. But all the promises went unfulfilled.
Yeah I hear the campaign cries of 'change'. But do you really think it's so? When candidates start talking about "Change for the better" I have to stifle the yawns and ask that you show me one who doesn't make the claim... blah, blah blah. Look at the experience and records...and then look into your daughter's eyes....there's a clear choice...and her name is Hillary.
1 comment:
Bush WASN'T a "beltway insider?" I mean, he may have been governor of Texas, but he comes from one of the most influential Republican families in American history... and his father was a congressman, UN ambassador, director of the CIA, VP, and president. Not exactly an "outsider."
Some people might have bought that in 2000, but it isn't true or a good comparison to Obama's legitimate "outsider" status.
On to Hillary. Have you looked at poll numbers? Her negatives are staggering and they're trending HIGHER. If you want Republican victory in November, by all means caucus for Hillary.
On to Obama. In line with the above, many, many "insiders" in D.C. are supporting... Obama because they realize that McCain vs. Hillary is a set-up for failure. Obama polls very well with independents and also polls relatively high among Republicans.
Back to Hillary. Yes, look at her and her husband's track records. Being by far the most conservative Democratic administration post-New Deal is hardly a "progressive" record. The unfortunate truth -- well, at least to our traditional constituency -- for we Democrats is that market-based approaches to policies often work better than bread-and-butter "progressive" policies. The Clintons and the New Democrats knew this in the '90s, but Bill and Hillary lied and pandered to keep the left-wing of the Democratic Party in line because they believed that progressives were too ignorant and/or ideologically stubborn to accept the evidence that markets do, in fact, deliver. Sad, but true fact.
The Clinton machine-style politics, my friends, should not be something that Democrats desire. And none of this is to say that the Republicans are better on this sort of thing. They're not. See Nixon, Bush.
Post a Comment