Tired Of A Name ?

I've made it pretty clear the I'd have preferred Hillary Clinton to have remained a NY Senator, period. They have their ideas and they seem to like her, since they elected her, but that's it, they like her. Well, NY and the Corporate Media minus Faux like her and even Faux has been going on forever about how she's a lock. She sure does have two things, money and name recognition. How about a voting record Democrats would like? I don't even mean the "looney left" like me, I mean Democrats.

I'll start off with the derailed locomotive of politics, Iraq, some folks have admitted to making a mistake there, some folks never made a mistake there, and Hillary? Try tracking the national polls on the subject and setting those beside her stands right afterward. I can barely get along with the idea that intelligent well-informed people went for the lies, shortly thereafter the lies became transparent, not Hillary.

Civil liberties rank a touch higher in my considerations, not because I minimize death and destruction, but because you'll play holy hell getting them back once the government has gotten hold of them, but I'm playing this card second. Check Mrs Clinton's votes in this regard. Not so hot. Then toss in her public statements regarding gun control, she'd like very much to stomp a mud hole in that particular civil liberty. For those of you enamoured of that stance, I'll just point out to you, once again, that BushCo's arguments and yours are identical and that should inform your philosophy. (if you feel insulted, ask yourself why)

Regarding guns and elections, Kerry would have won with a decent chunk of the middle politics gun owners. He didn't get it, Hillary won't either.

This is the lady who took such a beating over health care, but take a look at her stances regarding corporate advantages. Let's just take a look at her stance on illegal immigration amnesty and just how interested she is in holding employers to the law regarding hiring, can you get any deeper in the corporate pocket? Fine, lose the rest of the picture, but who do you think has been making money hand over fist off the backs of the serfs? She and her allies aren't trying to be nice to the poor oppressed brown people, they're playing to their corporate sponsors, if you get sucked along for the ride, that's wonderful for them.

On the topic of the health care debacle, she didn't get her head handed to her for working on health care so much as she got whacked for doing it in secret. There's a road I want to go down again. The loon right has its opinions on the matter, but the wide spread push back was over the secrecy. You are conveniently supposed to forget this stuff.

If you're on this page the chances that you're a fan of the DLC are pretty small. She's their darling. If you're wondering a little about that comment, consider where the dust up with DNC and DLC started and think a little about why it started. Hmmm, who is the corporate wing of Democratic politics? Just to pile on DLC a little harder, they try to take credit for the '06 election results, but a close check of election results makes that claim entirely specious.

I've run for office, it's a really trying exercise. There are a lot of aspects to it that aren't much of any fun at all, you have to do them, but nobody in their right mind would like it. Getting out and meeting people and having your say are actually the fun though defending yourself from preconceived notions and false claims are aggravating. The point is that this is a lot of hard difficult work and requires a real drive to win at it, so what's at the bottom of that drive? Is it to take a real good shot at improving your fellow citizens' lives or is just the ego thing about power? If playing in that league involves a policy agenda then you're going to have to push hard for it, no matter what you try, it is going to get watered down and compromised in some form before it gets through. If you start out the process most of the way over to the "other guy's side" that diluting process is still going to happen, triangulation is nonsense, that's what happens by the time it's done, not where you start. Hillary is proud of her triangulation, she should be ashamed of it.

If you're wondering who is a good model for triangulation, look no farther than GWB circa 2000. He worked that really hard, remember "compassionate conservative" and "uniter" as mantras? What we've found is that the citizenry can go screw itself, power and plutocracy are the name of his game. People noted that GeorgeII had good Conservative credentials and a good record of working with TX Dems, and Hillary seems to be getting the play of good liberal credentials and working with R's. BushCo wasn't Conservative, he was a small "c" theocrat and big "C" corporatist and in the end, a power junkie. What exactly are Hillary's liberal credentials? They don't exist as a record, they exist as an image.

As a hard working DPO I'll make myself clear, if she wins this Primary I might vote for her, depending on what kind of idiot the RNC runs, but I won't knock on a single door, pick up the telephone, or cough up $0.02 for her. I'll work my butt off for OR candidates, but that piece of political work can go hang. If you're wondering, I'm DPO and I wouldn't work against her in a General Election. Oh; about the name, that's a stupid reason to vote for or not, almost as meaningful as her gender.