The results from last night's New Hampshire primary are very disappointing to me. There is a real force for change among a great number of people in this country, but apparently the Granite State didn't get the memo. My disappointment is so great that it even overshadows my joy in the fact that Sen. John McCain won the New Hampshire primary, rightfully beating Govs. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee (especially Romney).I do not like Senator Hillary Clinton. I find her to be cold and calculating, and the thought of her being our next president does not fill me with hope for the following 4 (or 8) years. Furthermore, I look at her and former President Bill Clinton out on the campaign trail, and I simply see two people struggling to regain the power that they once had. The difference between those who support Sen. Clinton and myself is that they want a switch-up, while I want a shake-up. They want to go back to the years 1993-2001, while I want to move forward. They want Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton, while I don't want to spend the first 28-32 years of my life under the rule of two families. They want the status quo, while I want real change. Does that mean electing Sen. Obama? I don't know. I seem to be finding that the more years you've spent in this country, the less you feel that the country is "ready" for a black president. I have also spoken to a number of people who fear that Sen. Obama may very well meet the same fate as late President John F. Kennedy, and his brother Bobby -- and probably by the same powers. Younger citizens, I think, tend to have a more optimistic view -- maybe we just haven't seen with our own eyes what has happened in the past to people who truly represent change.
Regardless, this country needs to get out of the back-and-forth of the past 20+ years, and to move forward into the upcoming ones -- there is so much potential to be harnessed. While I was watching the returns last night, I had the sudden strong urge to register in the Democratic Party, if for no other reason than so I can vote against Sen. Clinton. I've got until Friday to decide.
11 comments:
Wow,that's pretty pathetic! The Clinton years were the best years this country ever had. I guess you like the prospect of slaving your life away in the salt mines. Maybe you should give up all the technology and innovation that the Clinton's agenda brought you. Do you even remember those years or are you brain-washed by the incessant whining of the right-wing nuts? A return to the prosperity of the Clintons is more than welcome and right-wingers like you aren't going to stop our nation from progressing. McCain wants to bring us back to the fifties and Barack talks a good game but folds at the last minute. Maybe your hatred of our senator is your insecurity? It seems many men in this country have issues with a strong woman. Isn't that why we have viagra? Do some research on who wants to take us where and don't vote until you do. If you're smart you'll take the progressive route regardless of your personal short-comings.
How exactly does not liking one female candidate mean that I have an insecurity about strong women? And what exactly make me a right-winger?
Senator Clinton will bring forth change and experiance to the White House. Mr. Obama is to green, if we're not carefull we will elect a Republican.
Clinton is our best chance.
McCain is a right-wing nut that wants a hundred year war in the mesopotamian region! Either you are completely nuts or you are a right-winger (which also is nuts).
There's only one female candidate you know. So defend yourself by explaining that your dislike is not fear of women. BTW,does it really take a jab with a pointy stick for you to show up? Blogs require input,they're not passive. Using this medium for mental masturbation is counter-productive. You still haven't explained your ambivalence to people voting. That's pretty republican of you as well.
The right is filled with a number of nuts (as is the left, by the way), but John McCain is not one of them. No, he does not want a hundred year war with the mesopotamian region (exclamation point or no exclamation point). I do not agree with him on every issue, but I think he's a conscientious, thoughtful, and intelligent person.
He said he wanted to maintain our presence there for a hundred years. Are you calling him a liar? Supporting him does make you a right-winger. Thinking that right-wingers aren't suffering from a mental disability is just denying scientific evidence. Do you have trouble with ethical judgement as well or are you just a little green? You might be too young. Do you support the occupation of Iraq against 70% of our nation's populace? If you do,it's a confirmation that you're right-wing to the extreme.
This will be my last post for this issue, for I am seeing the absurdity in humoring someone who hides behind the name "anonymous."
But I will say this: people like you are the reason that this country is so badly divided. Honest debate in this country is poisoned by those who are so self-righteous that they can't possibly fathom someone else having a legitimate, yet differing, point-of-view. And they get themselves so worked up that the only thing they can communicate is hateful name-calling.
For the record, I do not want our troops in Iraq, and I never have -- this war in Iraq is probably the worst foreign policy blunder in U.S. history, and that is saying something. But I also know that the "left-wing" in Congress is not doing much to change the situation.
In the end, there's a lot more that unites us than divides us, and disagreement and debate is only good if it leads to statesmanship.
Hiding? Ideas aren't hiding and it's really no business who puts them out unless someone is needy for attention. The fact is that you claim to have a left leaning perspective and either you're lying or ignorant. If you're against the war,you cannot support McCain. His main agenda is promoting the war under his misconception that this is a "christian nation" and as such we have a duty to fight a holy war against muslims. Further, your intent to join a party in order to vote against someone is just a despicable display of bad ethics. Typical it seems of Obama supporters. Now since you can't defend yourself and think that retreat from reason is the escape for you,I must conclude that you haven't the intellectual where-with-all to host a blog. Perhaps you'd be better off handing this off to someone more mature.
I would just like to ask "anonymous" what his/her problem is. If you can't engage in meaningful exchange of ideas, then why respond to a blog? Why do you need to be so sarcastic and condescending? Instead, why don't you substantiate your assertions by telling us where you are getting your information on John McCain. A "holy war against muslims?!" Unless you can present proof of such inflamatory assertions, then you ought not be making them.
CNN has broadcasted comments today from Michigan with McCain stating his "christian nation" crap. He's been to Liberty University to ask for the support of the late Falwell,the guy who praised the 9/11 attacks. What meaningful exchange do you offer? Nothing? So far there is no exchange because this blog is a bogus front for right-wing propaganda. There's no liberal view here. There's no centrist view either. Either the Journal is a Murdoch rag or somebody is lying. The only sarcasm is Steve's. Filmer14-if you're not Steve under a different name,congratulations for showing up. Now come up with an opinion. Ditto-heads ruin blogs.
Post a Comment