Skip to main content

That does it. The final, frakking straw.

I have five main political interests, as things go; climate change, agriculture, women's rights, war and corporate power. All of the major presidential candidates have entirely worn out their welcome with me on one or more of them. Or started off bad and have failed to convince me that they're truly reformed from their positions of a few years or months ago. And let's not even get into healthcare. National insurance plans with private sector partnerships, my donkey.

Partisan leanings? Eh. I've long said I'd vote for the Democrat. Also that I'm not inspired by any of them like with Dean in 2004. They don't do IT for me. If I'm supposed to pick someone because I just like them and am really motivated by them, or their policies, well, I've got a pretty high threshold for that. My only honest reaction is 'why can't I pick Gore, like I wanted to in the first place?'

My presidential primary strategy has been to ignore the candidates as much as possible unless they do something that annoys me. I listened to them at the DNC winter meeting, at the Yearly Kos debate, and then at the last debate. Really, I've had other things on my mind and I don't live in an early primary state, anyhow.

Yet I do know that, because I tried to listen to it like a voter instead of a blogger hoping for a story, Clinton was the only major candidate I remember at all from the Yearly Kos debate. She was the only one who had the guts to be honest about telling us something she knew would be hideously unpopular, and did the hard thing instead of insulting our intelligence to avoid getting booed.

And while I've mostly been able to tune the candidates out, I haven't been able to get away from the persistent annoyances of their attackers. OMFG, a millionaire lawyer who doesn't go to Supercuts, even though he gives a damn about people who've seen the business end of a food stamp! Jumpin' Jehoshaphat, a multi-ethnic lawyer who went to a funny school in a foreign country and has a name that doesn't just scream One White Guy! Holy Cannoli, Batman, a female lawyer who's gotten high dollar campaign contributions from the lobbyists of the industries whose executives just give to her opponents directly!

Unfortunately for me, and for you if you're not a Clinton fan, some of the most annoying critiques of Clinton come from the blogosphere. That, I can't tune out, which is probably why they annoy me so much. Everyone notices the pebble in their own shoe. Alternately, there's the rank sexism, though that mostly comes from the pundits.

So, because I've already included her in my blanket endorsement of whatever Democrat wins, and because it may give people like David Mizner and Chris Matthews screaming fits of high-pitched apoplexy, which will greatly comfort me when stupid Democratic policies are driving me up a wall; I hereby endorse Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008.

You know how much good my endorsement will do for Clinton? I predict, none. You know how much good it will do for me? Negative. Now, when I bitch about candidates, as I've always done, people will say I'm doing it because I've endorsed Clinton, instead of because her opponents tick me off. And when I criticize her, they'll probably just say that I'm doing it to preserve the illusion of balance, instead of because she ticked me off. And I'm probably going to have to put up with crap from readers, with whom she's about as popular as she is with me, or worse, saccharine pats on the back from her supporters for finally coming around.

What will people say when I still bitch about candidates being attacked unfairly? Hopefully, they will be justly confused, if they're that sort. I will do a little dance of joy.

This is a proposition with no tangible upside for me. But the same goes for the alternatives. At least this way, I get to annoy people who deserve it. Sorry if you oppose her and don't deserve my ire, but sometimes a person just has to take what they can get and call it a day.

At least she has a decent energy plan. That's not nothing. Sigh.

Anyway, a big thanks to all of Hillary Clinton's detractors for helping me make up my mind about this. Fences make for uncomfortable seating, and just imagine how much time you've saved me sitting there poring over all the policy programs which haven't a chance in hell of making it as-is through our Russert-whipped, telecom-purchased, twitchy as a cat in a rocking chair factory Congress. Now I can continue putting exactly as much attention into the primary process as I had done before, while getting maximal return on the irritation factor of my writing.

x-posted at pacificviews.org

Originally posted to natasha on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:01 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Welcome to the club (8+ / 0-)

    Hillary 08

    All of us have to recognize that we owe our children more than we have been giving them. -- Hillary Clinton

    by Peter Deane on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:04:46 AM PST

  •  You are entering a world of pain. (10+ / 0-)

    We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine

    And the machine is bleeding to death.

    by Marcus Tullius on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:09:48 AM PST

  •  Vote for Hillary to spite everyone? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bugscuffle

    That fits since it seems to the primary reason Hillary is running.

  •  Me, too... (11+ / 0-)

    it is the unadulterated hateful, name calling, insulting adolescent flaming on the "liberal" blogs that is pushing me more and more toward Hillary.

    I get especially annoyed when people like Chris Matthews are given credence when his lies are repeated here as if they are facts.

    I started out leaning toward John, with Hillary second, and Obama and Kucinich third.  None of them were out of the realm of possibility for me.  They all remain candidates I can support despite not being perfectly in agreement with me on all things.

    I get what democracy is.  I get that a leader should NOT be able to do what they want without support from the people's house, even if I sometimes want them to be able to.  I get that Bush has tried to take too much power for the executive branch.  I get that we (the people unable or unwilling to elect a progressive majority) have not been effective in stopping these people (the neocons power surge since Reagan).  

    But I am sick and tired of the blame game. I just heard this morning the idiots in the punditry pulling the same sh*t on Hillary (Scarborough and friends).
    I really do not want a country where idiots in the pundit class get free reign to lie and cheat and pretend they are being patriotic.  
    And I want a liberals and progressives who are open minded, not close minded name calling surrogates for the right wing talking points.  It's getting tiresome.

    •  Why would you waste your time on Matthews? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      frandor55, Sharon Jumper

      read a book.

      Try Rasahid Khalidi, "Resurrecting Empire."

      It's short. You will learn.  No lies.

      When a coward sees a man he thinks he can beat he becomes hungry for a fight. -Chinhua Achebe, Things Fall Apart.

      by BughouseWW on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:32:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I read all the time. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jim J, cpresley, phoenixdreamz, Lobsters

        However, as frustrating as it is, I feel it is important to know what idiots on the tube are saying because a vast majority of voters end up believing them. For me, knowing their lies prepares me to make sure those in my life KNOW they are being fed lies.

        Thanks for the book, recommendation.  It will work my way on to my list of books to read.  I have a long list and am currently reading a few others...one fiction and one non-fiction political book.

    •  I agree (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      natasha, cpresley, phoenixdreamz

      I generally link stupid diaries, stupid articles and stupid comments to.... well, stupid people.

      Once you identify a thought pattern common to stupid people, the opposite point of view can be reasonably inferred to be the more rational.

      I've seen a whole lot of very stupid anti-Clinton diaries, stories and comments.
      That makes the anti-Clinton position seem less intelligent by the day.

      Disclaimer: Not everyone I've seen in the anti-Hillary camp is stupid. Some few I believe to be very intelligent...(however misguided), progressive, caring people.
      But not all.

      So I'm not calling anyone in particular "stupid".
      But if the shoe fits...

      "As God is my witness, I thought wingnuts could fly."

      by Niniane on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:38:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting Phenomena.... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim J, natasha, Dale Read

      I have seen the TV pundits (Tweety, Russert, among others) make sexist comments in regard to HRC and the campaign.

      I make a major distinction between pundits, and the bloggers who see Clinton's evasiveness on issues such as Iraq, Iran , torture, corporate donations as very important.

      Because the pundit class has trashed HRC does not make her a better candidate than Obama or Edwards. The logic escapes me.

      'It's deja vu all over again'-Yogi Berra

      by frandor55 on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:09:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I realize they're two separate things (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        frandor55, cpresley, cookiecutter

        I've made a lot of criticisms of her on those issues as well. But neither have the other candidates escaped scrutiny with my full good opinion intact.

        •  i don't really understand Your Endorsement (0+ / 0-)

          it "seems" that what it amounts to is "she isn't as bad as everyone is saying she is" so You are going to support her to balance that out!?

          i'll concede that she is likely not as bad as many HRC detractors say she is ... but, honestly, that is likely to go for most every candidate (except for maybe mike gravel! ;):) ) ... and for the most part -- i don't think that many of the Dem candidates are patently unqualified ... HRC doesn't really STAND out -- except as a woman and a Clinton (i don't think either of those should disqualify or qualify her especially)

          •  Did you hear her speech at (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jim J, cpresley, cookiecutter

            Wellesley last week?

            While I have not yet come to a conclusion about a candidate and will no doubt follow Molly Ivins's directive to vote primaries with my heart and generals with my head, I have to say that it was a really good speech.

            She turned Bush's "go shopping" suggestion right on its head with a section on how various and sundry members of the younger generation have heard the call for volunteerism and listed out any number of ways that different groups are experiencing a surge in volunteers and recruits. She listed a number of different initiatives. And she talked about how important all of this was to building a brighter tomorrow.

            It was a good speech...

            Novel? What novel? Oh...that novel...

            by kredwyn on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:58:10 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  One thing that is also important to me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    owlbear1, BughouseWW

    is a candidate who has the stamina and ideas that will get us out of this hole that the Bush administration has created.

    Great ideas about moving us forward with the environment and women's rights are important, but they're not the most important issues facing this country.  Health care is beyond the crisis level, our economy is about to collapse, our relationship to the rest of the world is nearly non-existent and without addressing those issues aggressively we cannot survive.

    Business and politics as usual will not work, and I fear that it is the only thing that Senator Clinton can or will offer.


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:22:28 AM PST

  •  Good diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jim J, Radiowalla

    I think extremely vitriolic attacks on Clinton are in the wait still because most Independents and even a lot of partisans still don't care about this election yet.  It is slightly less than a whole year away!

    Any hatred within a party is almost always far worse in the mainstream.

    -5.88, -5.85 Pelosi shut the door on impeachment when all a responsible leader needed to do was leave it impartially open as it always should be.

    by Nulwee on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:34:39 AM PST

  •  You've convinced me... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kredwyn, Shiborg

    Things haven't changed a bit since I left the country in August. I was hoping that ya'll would fix this stuff and draft a candidate that I could be excited about by the time I returned to the US. I got excited at the prospect of a Colbert candidacy, til THE MAN squashed that dream.

    Meh.

    I'm supporting Spongebob for President.

  •  Be Careful. She is Satan. (10+ / 0-)

    I've seen laser beams COME RIGHT OUT OF HER EYES!!!

    I think Sen. Clinton would make a very good president.

    by bink on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:37:00 AM PST

  •  It's an adult choice, (0+ / 0-)

    sadly this may be a child's world.

    I always have to remember that owing to the nature of universal suffrage, half the electorate has below average intelligence; and I must say despite their apparent ability to (more or less) properly administer a keyboard, the internetz is proportionately represented by that ratio.

    --------
    If Hillary Clinton is elected, the terrorists will come to your house and bite your children's eyeballs out. -- ancient GOP proverb

    by PBJ Diddy on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:37:24 AM PST

  •  So endorse Kucinich. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shiborg, brownsox, wmacdona66

    I like this diary.  I'm gonna rec it.  But, a have a one critical remark, I guess.

    You wrote:

    She was the only one who had the guts to be honest about telling us something she knew would be hideously unpopular, and did the hard thing instead of insulting our intelligence to avoid getting booed.

    I have absolutely no doubt that Clinton wanted to get booed, that she was angling for a good on-tape boo from the wacko left-wing netroots.  She or her people were undoubtedly hoping that Russert at all would play it the following Sunday.

    None of them are listening to us, beyond listening as part of a crafted campaign strategy, or else very-noticably-and-publically not noticing us, also as part of a campaign strategy.

    •  I don't know about that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LithiumCola, cpresley

      They may have just assumed they were pretty widely hated and decided not to stir the hornets' nest. I mean, at least I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on that.

      And I don't know that she did want to get booed. I saw her in the breakout room at YKos, I was expecting for something unpleasant to happen and wanted to be ringside, but she was really charming and acted like she wanted to connect well with the people in the room. I didn't get the impression she was trying to foil off of us at all, even when she was asked a potentially (though it was politely phrased) question about a sensitive topic. She was just working the room, like they all do, trying to win people over.

  •  There aren't many of us here. (6+ / 0-)

    We're a lonely bunch.

    But we do what we can.

    Joe Lieberman likes to be called an "Independent Democrat". I like being called a "sexual dynamo".

    by Arjun Jaikumar on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:41:06 AM PST

  •  Yup, did it for me. (6+ / 0-)

    The anti-Hillaries, I mean. Pushed me into her corner. About a month ago.

    The most annoying anti-Hillary criticisms are that she's too competent.

    What I wouldn't give for competence in government (say, start with FEMA and the State Department) and someone who can work with Congress to actually get some decent legislation passed (S-CHIP, a realistic approach to global warming & energy policy).

    "Control of the initiative is control of the battle. In the alley, at the poker table or in politics. One must raise." David Mamet

    by coral on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:45:47 AM PST

  •  Congratulations! I think you are saving yourself (7+ / 0-)

    a lot of aggravation by remaining neutral and supportive and also honestly critical of all of the candidates until the calendar forces you to choose.  ;-)

    I have been doing the same thing and I know how distressed I feel when I see other John Edwards supporters act obnoxious about Hillary.  I also feel dismay and sometimes outrage when I cannot see what others are so entranced about with Obama.  Finally, I feel that Hillary is a member of my family because I have been through so much with her and Bill.  I could go on and on because at heart I support all of them and at heart I disagree with all of them about some aspects of their campaigns.  This causes me to feel more anguish when I should be filled with optimism and pride.  Our side really is up to the brim with excellent candidates but who are all flawed to some extent.  Just like a parent, I feel the pain when they do not live up to the standards I want them to have.  I want them to be perfect...and perfect means whatever strikes me as perfect at the moment.  But I suffer for each and every one of them when (s)he falters on any aspect of perfection.  By supporting only one candidate, I only have to suffer the imperfections of that particular one candidate.  

    I must honestly admit that in the beginning of this comment, I was teasing you a little bit but as I wrote I realized that I was, in fact, being truthful about my situation.  It is more painful to support everybody because I do want each to be and to appear to be perfect and it is because I am so damned enraged with the Republicans and with every damned thing they do, say, or appear to think.  I don't want there to be a single thing that any Republican can realistically criticize about any of our candidates.  That is unrealistic and I can save myself a lot of grief if I would just commit to one candidate then I would only have to defend the imperfections of one candidate rather than of all of them.

    Thank you for making me think a little bit this morning.  Recommended.

    •  Well I Plan To Vote For Edwards (4+ / 0-)

      and I'd stand by you 24/7 if Hillary got attacked. I dislike the fact people here can't have a polite conversation about who they support. If it is this ugly now, my gosh where is it going to go as we get closer to the election.

      I plan to vote for Edwards, but if Hillary is in the general I'll feel pretty darn good voting for her. Just not my first choice.

      Let Is not forget New Orleans. Visit Project Katrina.

      by webranding on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 05:57:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Glad to hear it (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jim J, macmcd, cpresley

        You're exactly the sort of person I wasn't aiming at when I wrote this.

        •  There Are A Few Issues (0+ / 0-)

          where I don't agree with Hillary. But to be frank, why I won't even consider voting for her in the primary is cause my entire adult life (and I am pushing 40) a Bush or Clinton has been in the White House. IMHO that is wrong on many different levels.

          Let Is not forget New Orleans. Visit Project Katrina.

          by webranding on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:08:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Edwards is the only candidate that I have (0+ / 0-)

            sent money to and he is the candidate that my husband actually does support wholeheartedly.  Oddly, while I support all of the candidates but feel the most "warmth" toward Hillary for exactly the reason that you wouldn't support her in the primary.  The twelve years of Reagan and Bush Sr. had really gotten this country in a mess.  My husband had lost his job because of some changes that Reagan had made in allowing companies to be acquired.  My husband's company way taken over by another company and lots of people lost their jobs.  We were devastated financially because he was not able to find a real job for three years and then the company was so flaky that he was able to find that he wasn't paid regularly for another two after that.  On top of all of that, Reagan had changed the tax laws and we were hurt even more by the IRS changes.  

            Then Bill Clinton was elected POTUS and his first budget changed the tax system enough that those changes bailed us out of the $9 thousand in taxes, interest, and penalty that we owed to the IRS.  Clinton actually was able to change so many of the things that Reagan and Bush had screwed up that it seemed that he was able to do miracles.  He is certainly the best thing to happen to this country in my adult lifetime and I can recall presidents back to FDR who died on my birthday in 1945.  From my personal point of view, even though Hillary would not be the same as being able to vote for Bill to be POTUS again, she would certainly be able to get excellent advice from the only person in this country that has shown once that he was competent enough to turn this country around from the wreck that Reagan/Bush had put it in at that time. In an odd way, I see Hillary as the medicine to cure the cancer that Bush/Reagan/Bush have inflicted on this country.

            In addition, I do believe that Hillary has really been an excellent candidate independent of Bill.  She has not been perfect but she has done a very good job in all of the debates and, to me, it seems clear that she would be a good president.

            With all of the above, why have I not absolutely committed to Hillary in the same way that I was committed to Howard Dean.  Very good question.  I think it is because I still think that John Edwards,  and most of the others would also be really good presidents and I don't want to be disappointed with the nominee like I was the last time.  I don't want to be disheartened like I was when Kerry was nominated.  I am afraid that I will start pulling for the others to make mistakes and do stupid things that I don't want to feel that way about our candidate.  

  •  She's a perfect candidate for people (0+ / 0-)

    who think Democratic policies are stupid.

    which will greatly comfort me when stupid Democratic policies are driving me up a wall;

    HRC 08 is premised on democrats being on the wrong side of issues, and that it's smart politics to dodge and weave to the nom so that she can start triangulating to those independents and republicans that are so popular.

    Read Obama's 2002 speech against invading Iraq. http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm

    by Inland on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:01:49 AM PST

    •  Have you been watching Congress lately? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cpresley, cookiecutter

      Have you seen their approval rating? If Clinton is the candidate for people who think Democratic policies are stupid, particularly if you're talking about the actual policies enacted by actual office-holding Democrats, then she's damn near everybody's candidate.

      •  Caucus is unpopular. (0+ / 0-)

        The democratic caucus has low approval ratings because it's not enacting democratic ideas, not because democrats don't like democratic ideas.  

        Moreover, that's not really relevant to my assertion that HRC is the candidate for people who don't like democratic ideas, and the candidate who thinks that democratic ideas are losers.  It really more confirms it.

        Read Obama's 2002 speech against invading Iraq. http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm

        by Inland on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:08:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  "She's damn near everybody's candidate" (0+ / 0-)

        Isn't that the exact problem with her? She's everybody's candidate! She is trying to please everybody, or at least not piss off anybody too much. What the hell does she stand for? What will she do as president? She won't say!

        She's a focus-grouped, poll-tested snake in the grass.

        Do fundies consider Joshua 10:13 proof that the sun goes around the earth?

        by Shiborg on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 06:48:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Absolutely (0+ / 0-)

    Vote for who you please. I don't like HRC, and have said so, but I actually came here to get more information, from the wonky, tuned-in lefties around here. I am still largely undecided, think most would govern well, or better at least than Bu$hCo. For my own part though, I told myself on the day of her vote for war authorization, that though she might get elected (and that wouldn't be the end of the world), she wouldn't get my vote to do it.

  •  I think you will be very pleasantly surprised at (4+ / 0-)

    what a great President she turns out to be.

    These are momentous times and  -

    Time is going to force decisions to be made.

    In the next eight years we must

    Fix Medicare

    Fix Social Security

    Fix Health Care Period

    Get out of this war

    Avoid a war with Iran

    Get the Military Industrial Complex out of Government for Good.

    Reverse the current effort of trying to beggar the American middle class

    This country needs change

    The first change is to kill the notion of male superiority

  •  It appears my posts have been deleted (0+ / 0-)

    Why?

    When a coward sees a man he thinks he can beat he becomes hungry for a fight. -Chinhua Achebe, Things Fall Apart.

    by BughouseWW on Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 07:10:06 AM PST

  •  I too support Hillary (0+ / 0-)

    and the one-demensional, emotionally-driven hate Hillary garbage on this site probably did push a little bit. But in the end it was mostly I think she's the best qualified of the top three Democratic contenders, would do the best in the general election, and her experiences would make her an effective leader. Also driving Republicans insane, a huge plus in my book.

  •  Why I'm Endorsing Hillary (0+ / 0-)

      Hey, she's one tough lady.  My mother and my grandmother would have loved her (although they might have described her somewhat differently).

        Now, you can go back to working with Al Gore and the rest of the world to save the EARTH.  Us Hillary supporters will do our bit from this end.

        Thanks.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site