I absolutely promise you, on a stack of Philip K. Dick novels, that I want Democrats to win this election. There is no question of this, not in my heart of hearts, my literal beating heart or, heading outward, my surface-oriented (much of the time) brain or body-wide epidermal layers. I want Democrats to win, friends. And I truly believe they are going to win. (I'm an optimist in pessimist's clothing, you see.)
Having said all of that (slot it in the "requisite" file), I have to now say this: I don't care who the candidate is, I'm not going to vote for the fucker just because he/she is a Dem. That's bullshit of the most rankly stinking variety, and I will not participate in such an intellectually dishonest exercise. I mean, hey, I dig film noir, I fucking
love that form, but there are some examples that are awful, hideous, wretched, things that aren't worth owning
just because they're film noir. Ditto Democratic candidates. They may be running as Dems, but they may just be no better than your average Republican, or so damned cautious they ain't worth shit-all.
Let us take Mr. Harold Ford.
Now here is the dream Dem, seemingly: black and from Tennessee, a hardcore southern state. But being black and from a red state that the Democratic party lusts to turn a deep shade of blue does not a qualified, respectable candidate make, for lo, Mr. Ford has come out against New Jersey's progressive ruling on same-sex marriage. It's a step in the right direction for New Jersey; it should be blasted from tree tops and the furthest reaches of space and time - by Democrats, liberals, progressives, etc. - that this, and gay marriage in general, are the inevitable products of a secularism-first nation. Yet Mr. Ford doesn't agree with New Jersey's ruling - or at least he's saying he doesn't, whether he truly does or not. He's obviously afraid, see. His principles need to take a back seat to what's safe and what the completely out-of-touch focus groups say. I'd love to hear what he has to say on the Iraq war: against it from the very beginning, or just against the prosecution of it? (The latter category is the war-party home of Rahm Emmanuel's favorite candidates; I don't know if Ford is one or what his stance on Iraq is, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear he's got Mr. Emmanuel's predilections, or, send more troops, that's the preferred panacea...bullshit, in other words.)
I guess the point is this: who in their right mind has any use for a candidate from either party (note: only two "legitimate" parties to choose from is part of the problem) who's short on principles but long on desire for office, and power? I sure don't. I don't play at being a progressive or a liberal, and my first proof is to say, I'm not a card-carrying progressive or liberal - but, when my views and feeligns and politics come out in the wash, there's only one party for me to call home, and that's the Democratic one. So I go with it, sending the Dems $50 and buying an industrial-strength paperclip to mash my nostrils shut. I don't hate them, but I far from love them.
Lastly, let us face the simple fact that America in general has thrown the Republicans under the bus. Is it the character, the truth-telling energy, the pointy backbone of the Democrats that's winning America over, tipping the polls more absurdly every day the Democrats' way? No, friends, it's not. It's the naked mendacity and national betrayal of the Republicans that's done that. The Dems are all we have left. And even though it'll piss a few people off (as if I haven't done that already at this point in my diary), the Dems are gonna win, you know? They're gonna win because, again, they're all we have left. Which is assuredly part of the problem.
Here's what will make me a pariah: if only the Greens were stronger...