Why Pillory Hillary? 

Until now I have given little time and analysis to the political campaigns.  For the purpose of this essay, I will not discuss in any detail the flock of dodos that inhabit the Republican side of the debates. 

I prefer to focus on the far more consequential issues and strategies surrounding the various Democratic candidates and more important the absolute necessity of insuring a Democratic President and a Democratic majority in Congress.  As I have often said, never underestimate the ability of the Democrats to wrest defeat from the jaws of victory. 

With that in mind, I must first discuss the issue of the two apparent Democratic front runners - Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  As a long time supporter and admirer of Dennis Kucinich, many will find this new advice I am about to deliver quite contradictory from my previous positions. 

After considerable deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that it is absolutely imperative that we elect a Democrat (any Democrat) to the Presidency this time around.  Unfortunately due to a prematurely unwise decision born out of my feelings that this was the election that might see the immergence of a viable third party, I decided early on to run as a delicate for the  Progressive/Green Party. 

This affiliation precludes my active campaigning for any Democrat in the primaries and my own local Missouri Caucus. After the convention,  I do intend to work manfully (personfully?) for whomever the Democratic Party nominates. 

What has caused me to abandon my idealism and adopt this crass pragmatism?  Once again we are faced with what will probably be a case of the lesser of two evils.  First of all, I do not believe that the upcoming election will do much to influence foreign policy: our attempts to halt the spread of democracy in South America, the war in Iraq, our threatening stance against Iran, our unwavering support for the genocidal government of Israel or our brutish image among people of good will in the larger world. 

The last Congressional election has disenthralled me from the delusion that there will be any difference between the Democrats and the Republicans when it comes to the spread of US Imperialism abroad. I think that the best we can hope for in a government dominated by the Democrats will be primarily a dramatic change in U.S. fiscal and domestic policy. 

I firmly believe that a Democratic Presidency and Congress will begin the slow retreat from the giant strides toward police state fascism made under the Republicans.  Hopefully there will be a restoration of the minimal requirements of competence in the day to day operation of government and the rule of law in the conduct of the business of government.  It is disturbing to me to see so many Republicans defending Bush's crimes, or at least ignoring them - especially when there is no earthly advantage to be derived from such a position. 

This disinclination on the part of most of the Republican candidates to publicly disavow Bush is perhaps the single greatest Albatross that will sink them as a Party - unless the Democrats do something really stupid - like nominating Hillary Clinton. 

I believe that neither of the present front runners of the Democratic Party, Hillary and Barack can win the general election.  For the sake of this argument, let us not discuss the virtues and vices of these two.  Let us examine it solely on the basis of pragmatism.  Hillary cannot win.  She has a far too polarizing a persona.  She will mobilize the Republicans more that if they were to run Jesus H. Christ himself on their ticket. 

Also Hillary is certain to divide mainstream Democrats more than Hugo Chavez and the Palestinian issue combined.  Also I can not imagine any self respecting Progressive, Independent or liberal Democrat working on her campaign let alone turning out in any significant numbers to the polls in November.  

That is why I cannot possibly support a candidate so precisely designed to lose the general election.  In the case of the other running candidate, Barack Obama, I think (admittedly for all the wrong reasons) that a black man cannot possibly win in as continuing a racist country as Amerika. 

I probably have only slightly fewer integrity issues with Obama than I have with Clinton.  In spite of these, I feel that either candidate represents a Democratic suicide pill. At this point, I would have to admit that I could not even support my hero, Denis Kucinich. As I have said, there is no idealism in my position.  All I care about is getting someone other than one of the clinically insane Republican front runners elected President.

The one candidate that I would think has the greatest chance, who is also the least polarizing and most inclusive populist choice is John Edwards.  His stance on social services, the war in Iraq, the need to eschew government by lobby and corporate fascism, not to mention his early emphasis on addressing Global Warming makes him both the best person to not only attack the Republican record but also powerfully advocate for domestic reform.

What then is the strategy that I am advocating here?  First of all, we need to abandon, for now, our demands for an end to the war in Iraq.  I believe that no one presently in the field with the exception of Kucinich and Paul are really serious about an immediate end to the war.  Of all the leading candidates, Edwards is perhaps the only one I come even close to believing on this issue. 

For Chrissake, no one will even say very loudly that they are against a nuclear holocaust in Iran!  Don't forget the nukes are still very much on the proverbial table and Bush shows no signs of abandoning his saber rattling in the Strait of Hormuz.  The nightmare is not over. We could yet have a Gulf of Tonkin Resolution II. 

The best we can hope for this time around is some restoration of domestic tranquility, the freedom from illegal Federal invasions, reversing the erosion of our basic freedoms and the restoration of Habeas Corpus.  I can't see this happening under any of the present Republican front runners. 

The only hope is in the Democrats.  It will do no good to try to nominate a candidate who doesn't stand a chance of winning.  People who know me understand that I have little respect for either Hillary or Barack.  My point is that I would not support them in the Primaries, even if I felt they were people of honor and integrity. 

The Democrats - the Party's leaders and the voters need to realize that these two candidates cannot win and that supporting them will be an even bigger disaster for the Party and the country than a vote for Huckabee, or Giuliani. 

As one who cares deeply for the fate of this country, if not for the world, all I can do is urge my fellow Democrats to do all they can to defeat Obama and Clinton and elect a candidate who can secure the votes of discontented Republicans, swing voters, Independents, rank and file Democrats as well as liberals and Progressives.  I believe John Edwards is the only candidate running who can do this.  Voting for him is the only pragmatic thing to do. 
 
I hope I need not remind you that, unlike the last two Presidential elections, we will have to win this time not by just a close margin but by an overwhelming landslide majority to guarantee that this election cannot be stolen as it was in 2000 and 2004.

Recommend this article...

Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment

Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4