Influence Motivation Purpose Action Community Trust

Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Everything in Bloggeration #3

1. Richard (Rbastid):
2. Scott:
3. Travis:
4. Deep4est:
5. Sasha Martinez:

A litany of blog postings, as Hillary Clinton has lost the Democratic nomination to Barrack Obama. I was planning on writing EiB #3 much earlier than now, giving some of my viewpoints on Hillary vs Barrack. That didn't happen obviously. I felt bummed, demoralized, slightly depressed even. I mean, how could I write about why Hillary did not deserve the potential nomination of the democratic party, knowing full well that it might not get read (I don't know about that; this is the Activity Pit, after all;). I laugh now, as Hillary Clinton herself has given me one last shot to write that story.Originally, my idea for EiB #3 was to show how awarding all of Michigan and Florida's delegates to Clinton was totally wrong and completely undemocratic. Half a vote each to Clinton and Obama is still wrong, no matter how you look at it. But now, that debate is behind us. Now, several questions arise: When will Hillary Clinton end her campaign? Will it be graceful? Or will she try to take Obama down in a fiery wreck?

News Story: with remarks: Her defiant victory speech Tuesday night and her campaign’s silence this morning have Clinton’s aides and supporters asking the same question she asked herself last night: “What does Hillary want?”
Hillary has proven during this campaign season-- at least, since January, when she began a long streak of losses and overall failure, that she doesn't know what she wants. Sure she may say: 'I want to be the President' or 'I will be Barrack Obama's Vice Presidential candidate'. She's lost all reasoning-- perhaps even all her sanity-- thinking that Obama will choose her as his VP. What does Hillary want? To be the President of the United States of America, at any cost; to destroy Barrack Obama and his run; to destroy those that supported him; to destroy the people like you and me that may or may not have supported him. Certainly, if not to destroy, then to lead astray into the 2012 elections. To lead them astray like George W. Bush has since 2000.

“She’s holding out for something – but I’m not sure what it is,” a usually well-informed campaign advisor who spoke to Clinton yesterday told Politico.
To destroy, to lead astray. Hillary Clinton is leaving her own campaign staff, her own party in the dark. No matter how good a politician you are, you just don't do that! First and foremost, politicians must be communicators. They can't be anti-social towards even their own party, it's political suicide. If you think about it, why does she even try with her supporters? What she wants-- that one something she could be waiting for-- is money to fill her greedy little pockets. Your money. She has been beaten, and really, worse than what the delegate and vote counts would tell you. Self-financing her own campaign has wounded her doubly. Succumbing to defeat after having the nomination all but wrapped up, it has frazzled her beyond belief. Even to the point where she says: 'I will be the President with your support' or 'I will be Barrack Obama's Vice Presidential candidate'
But they were slowed by the lack of a clear signal from the candidate herself. I'm of the opinion that Clinton is doing this just to spite Obama. To ruin his chances of election. To lead astray and destroy the democratic party, democracy in general and the United States of America. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. In some combination, these three will be the end of us all.

“It’s not something you can demand,” said an aide. It's something which Clinton demands. 'I will be President' 'I will be Vice President' It's somehting she's accustomed to. 'I wear the pants here, Bill' 'You wont be able to run and win without me, Bill' have echoed throughout the clinton home for decades. Now, she expects Barrack and the American public to do the same for her.
The other requirement of the moment, according to Prince: That it be “clear that Obama is the Democratic nominee with a party united.”
Obama is the clear presidential candidate Hillary. The call for hope and change far outweighs the same-ol', same-ol' of a Clinton or Bush in the white house for nearly thirty years. Old school is on the way out with the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton and John McCain. The new school is coming in with the likes of Barrack Obama.
The other side of the equation is the value of what Clinton has to offer in a negotiation. The bottom line is that she has little choice, in the end, but to endorse Obama and to campaign for him.

Now, on to the blogs. They all have something to say. Let's take a look:

In response to Richard: I don't believe it to be any one party's fault that gas prices are so high, but the combination of big oil (maybe when they donate to PAC's will it become the politicians' fault) and our own fault. Without the state of Illinois gas tax, it goes for $3.47 a gallon. Still, in my opinion, a good dollar minimum too high. And where does that 53 cents go. Normally, it goes to road repair and costruction; some of it could go to schools and other projects vital to the state and it's people. I say, drive a horse and buggy like me. You save hundreds of dollars on your car insurance and gas simply because you wont have need of either. The roads and schools may go to crap-- or the ones that haven't already done so-- but who cares anymore? We're the ones that keep electing these politicians, these democrats and republicans. We're the ones who don't care, and we're being raped for that. Democrats and Republicans will rape and destroy you.I would tell the commentor who wishes to leave the United States: Do not leave. Unless it is for business or family purposes (family that live, or spouse that lived in a different country), do not leave. That in itself is unAmerican. One thing we all share as Americans: we don't like a loser. We like winners. People who can stick it out even through the toughest of times. Please, sir, don't be a loser.

In response to Scott: Barrack Obama is a snake in the grass. He's getting ready to strike at all Americans in november. The same can be said for John McCain. Where do we go from here? We elect someone outside the system to start at making things right. Not a politician, not directly affiliated with any one political party. That's where you start, thinking outside the box, you might say. I think Michelle Obama really is the greatest gauge to reveal Barrack's thinking. She has said some disturbing things in my opinion. It was hearing a speech she made several months back that lead me to think twice about her husband.Scott, it's change or same-ol', same-ol'. Clearly, you're not happy with same-ol', same-ol'. The people have spoken out for change. We need change; on November 4th, Barrack Obama will come in bringing his message of change, only one in a long line of candidates who've run on a platform of change. I believe, however, that we are waking up-- though rather slowly-- to what these 'candidates for change' really bring to the United States and its people. All they bring is that ol' same-ol', same-ol'. I think Barrack Obama will actually start a good change for us, I just don't think it will be the same change he, or any other politician envisioned.

In response to Travis: We have pretty much the same viewpoint. I do like the sports/gaming analogy of the first question. In Point #3, yes, I've noticed that. CNN is heavily biased against Obama and McCain. Wolf Blitzer (others too) doesn't even try to hide the fact that he wants Hillary Clinton to be the democratic nominee. Media Bias is a whole other issue entirely I could get into, but since this is about Obama/Clinton...

In response to Deep4est: I think otherwise. Clinton will try to take Obama down with her. I don't think she'll run Independent; she's too far in debt as it is-- her debt being one of her 'problems' right now, leading her not to call it off.

In response to Sasha Martinez: I was ok with this until you quoted Ron Paul. I was for Ron Paul before I was for Barrack Obama. There was Richardson in between those two; but Ron Paul? Ugh... The quote is true though. It just freaked me out reading who had quoted it. Dang...

No comments: