Posted by: Andy | January 18, 2008

No Hillary please.

Unless it came down to her vs. the current republican candidates (hey, maybe old McCain from like…5?? years ago, but I don’t like current McCain so much).
During the NH debated I listened to on Monday, Hillary & Richardson both kept bringing up their experience, to the point of it becoming a broken record.  Richardson’s doing this was mildly annoying in the sense of “Look at the old man who wants to be president, he can’t get his mind around the fact that we ALREADY HEARD HIM ONCE!”, but Hillary’s doing this caused me to go “Is she batshit crazy?”
I’ve read a few interviews with Richardson, and I think he would make a nice, moderate President, but he’s out of the running anyway.  And after hearing his debate performance (which wasn’t bad), I can’t help thinking of him as an old man, even if he isn’t.  At one point he even sounded like he was whining when he said “Since when is experience a bad thing?”
Anyway, Hillary is full of crap, as this Slate article points out.  Seriously, if she gets to count her jobs before actual politics as presidential prerequisite experience, then so can everyone else.  She was claiming something like 25 or 35 years…Richardson, who KICKS HER ASS in the experience department, hands down, wasn’t even claiming that long.
So yeah.  Shut up Hillary, next talking point please.
Advertisements

Responses

  1. So…you vote down party lines or you’ve actually heard every Republican candidate and hate them all?

  2. Here’a a little trick I use.

    Eeny. Meeny. Miney. ….. Mo.

  3. That would require me being in a party to vote down party lines wouldn’t it?

    I don’t hate any of them, I just wouldn’t want them for a president:

    Guiliani: Seriously? Does this require explanation? Whiney ass little media-whore bitch. Among other things, some probably not legal. He has done some nice about-faces too in preparation for his run.

    Romney: Not really that bad, just nothing in particular to like. Plus, he’s definitely a part of the “establishment” already with his father’s ties and all that. All the money he spends on campaigning kind of makes me ill.

    Huckabee: Mmm, if I thought GW had too much religion, then this guy is off the charts. Idiot wants to rewrite the constitution to better match the bible. (Yes, he actually said that.)

    Fred Savage: Whatever his name is. Him I’ve seen very little of, but the fact that he didn’t even bother to campaign until so late, and sat out the first several debates shows me how much he cares. Or how lazy he is. Fred Thomson, that’s it! Do we need another actor in politics? Although I guess Ahhnold is actually doing fairly well…

    McCain: Like I said, I liked him a few years ago, then he randomly took an about face turn (probably right about when he decided he was going to run for president), and lost all credibility in my eyes.

    Ron Paul: He’s a little nutty, and doesn’t understand as much as he thinks he does, but his heart seems to be in the right place. But, even if he didn’t write that racist/anti-semitic/anti-gay stuff in his newsletters, it shows that he wasn’t responsible at all with what was being done with his name. Which says to me “Hmm, would you be responsible enough to run a country? Maybe not.”

    Who am I missing?

    Dems:

    Hillary: She’s a perfect piece of the standard political machinery. Lame.

    Edwards: His smile creeps me out, but I like his policies for the most part. Vowed not to take any lobbyist money, has (supposedly) followed through. He made a dick ass comment last year or the year before though about how he should be the candidate because he was the only electable one, and it was very obvious from the context that he meant the only white male. If we held back attempts at progress just to get a certain party into office, then nothing will ever change.

    Like all the people who were pissed off at the Nader voters for “taking votes away” from Gore or Kerry or whoever that was…those people are stupid, the people that voted for Nader were actually doing something to change the system..I think he needed like 7% of popular vote (maybe 2%??) to get official status as a 3rd party for his party. Can you imagine how that would affect things to have a 3rd “official” party? Maybe not so much, but the possibilities are awesome. To me at least.

    Obama: The non votes on bills are a little weird, but if that’s the worst anyone can find, then hey. The guy has charisma shooting out his ass, which is more than I can say for any of the others. That shouldn’t be everything, but it does count for a lot. A leader that inspires is something to be desired. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush – none of them inspired (and that last one…he did the opposite). Also did the no lobbyist money thing I think. Although, IIRC, he did take a large chunk of money from nuclear (??) lobbyists at one point.
    Would have to do some research there, I forget.

    So yeah, I’ll probably vote for Obama, or Edwards. Or even Hillary as a LAST resort.

    My hope is for an Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama ticket. Either of those paired with Hillary wouldn’t be too bad either. Make her the VP though, so she can get some

  4. Huckabee’s tax reform sounds good and I of course agree with his pro-life and marriage ethics. Obama oozes charisma, yes, but I can’t respect someone who refuses to be a leader and instead cops-out by saying he doesn’t agree with something but he’ll allow it to continue? I’d rather support a flat out nazi who had the strength of his convictions. Obviously, I’m being hyperbolic. But let’s be real. Guiliani was the best thing for New York and he’s the best thing for this country. *Paid for by Rudy Guiliani.*

  5. i like the obama/edwards ticket…

    .dear god, this is meg, please don’t let hillary win the democratic nomination, that would be a real shame if that’s what we offered history to hold on to as our first female president.
    thanks.
    amen

  6. Wait, Fred Thompson is a politician turned actor (who, as far as one can tell, only plays politicians) returned to politics. So. …. sooo… sew buttons… on ice cream…and watch them fall off = MY FATHER-IN-LAW IS FROM WISCONSIN, I’M SORRY!

  7. Here’s some on the Fairtax bit that Huckabee is behind:

    http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2007/12/huckabee-fair-tax-fallacies.html
    http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/05/pf/taxes/fair_tax.moneymag/

    My main concern is brought up in the second link – people that don’t spend, ie the very wealthy, are going to make out even better than they are now.

    Since the very wealthy pay a good sized chunk of taxes (top 5% (income over $137,000) pay 57.1% according to the handy chart at Wikipedia – scroll down a bit on the right), that money would have to be made up somewhere…

    I’m all for redoing the tax system, but I don’t think this is the right way to do it.

    If we’re going to have a tax, I think income tax is the way to go. What annoys me is states that have both income and sales tax…it seems like they should just pick one or other. I suppose it would make sense if states all did sales tax and federal did all income tax.

  8. Sometimes I think that trying to guilt people into voting is ridiculous when we get to choose between a black suit and a dark blue suit. This sucks.

  9. Err, am I coming off like I’m trying to guilt people into voting? Hopefully not, not my intention. I’m just venting on why I dislike particular candidates, and maybe why I dislike others less.

    US politics seems like its almost always about varying colors of suits, if that is the metaphor. Both sides firmly in the pockets of outside interests (we’re not too far from that this year, but it is possible that Edwards & Paul at least were relatively removed from that, or at least made efforts to show that they were. Possibly Kucinich too, but I didn’t spend that much time looking into him since I had a feeling he wouldn’t make it anywhere), with very little to distinguish them.

    I think people are making a lot more out of this campaign than maybe they should. Sure we have a woman, a black man, a mormon, a man frequently video taped in drag, and a minister are all “viable” candidates. And a latino and a conspiracy theorist type, but they’re both out of the race. That is definitely progress, BUT it doesn’t mean that these people are going to run any more of an honest/clean/good campaign than anyone before them – even if they wanted to I’m not sure they could. They are still hiring the same hatchet men and crew members that their predecessors used.

    But, there is always hope. Maybe I just finally feel hopeful because the end of the Bush years are in sight. Maybe some people will be sad about the same thing. That’s cool too.

  10. No, no, no, that wasn’t a comment about your conduct. I’m referring to other people’s and the “responsible” media’s standpoint. The only progress we seem to make is statistical. It’s pretty lame that the first Black candidate is just now arriving and it’s more lame that it’s such a big deal that people are willing to vote based on that. Or that the media acts surprised when a salon full of Black women come to the conclusion that they’ll vote according to the issues important to them and not according to race or gender. Really? That’s news? That’s sad. Oh. Also, this super bowl will see it’s first Black referee. Progress. 2008.

  11. Lastly, and I’m considering persisiting through the frustration and just blogging about it: where’s the progress that makes feminism less hyperbolic. Why is the death of children attached to women’s rights? Yes, I’m referring to abortion. If abortion is legal, you shouldn’t be allowed to sue deadbeat men for child support. If one gets a choice, both do.


Categories

%d bloggers like this: