I love the populist message of John Edwards, so he was my second choice because he held hope for shifting power away from the corporations and back to the people.
But it's pretty obvious that I have shown my current bias here. And I love these ads.
h/t to openthread at Daily Kos
--the BB
4 comments:
Well, he's got the best commercials that's for sure. And almost a whole year of experience in the sentate so...
Yes, Clinton has more years in the U. S. Senate, though with Obama's 8 years in the Illinois Senate prior to the U. S. Senate he has more years as a legislator than she. They're both brilliant too. Amid the flurry of articles debating experience, here are two.
Hillary Says Obama Is Another Inexperienced Bush
I Refuse to Buy into the Obama Hype
Paul -- I am ambivalent on hope vs experience although I lean toward experience. On the other hand, I am tired of the excitement re a black person (what is it 14% of the population?) finally breaking through the barriers as opposed to the status quo of a woman (I think 51% of the population) doing so. I worked for a progressive company that in the late 60's had black males in their management program but god forbid no females. But in the end I will happily vote for Barak but will be sad that the horror about female cooties continues to influence US politics as it does the fringes of the Anglican "Communion"
I would love to see a woman president. It is past time for us to catch up to the rest of the world!
I am not going to launch a big primary debate here; only say that my preference at this point is Obama. My own feelings about Clinton have nothing to do with her gender.
I quite agree that the boys in power need to get the hell over their female cooties issue: in American politics and Anglican power struggles. Sheesh.
I happen to love Obama's ads and I think it is highly unfortunate the Clinton's advisors have her tone (I am not saying content) sound increasingly Republican. She deserves better.
My blog; my preference.
Post a Comment