If there is one thing we can say about the Republicans, it's that while they may have the knives out for each other before the convention, they come together afterward and they vote for their nominee. If Giuliani is the nominee, the radical pro-life people WILL vote him, and I don't give a rat's ass what Dobson says. They stick together because, as insane or delusional as their ideology might be, they understand something basic. In order to govern, you have to WIN THE G-D DAMNED ELECTION. A lot of people seem to have trouble with this concept.
I'm old enough to remember 1968, back when I was a teenage member of the Dark Side. Richard Nixon, facing a split conservative movement (Wallace to his right), won by the narrowest of margins. Hubert Humphrey wasn't the ideal candidate in the eyes of many Democrats, and a lot of them either didn't contribute money to him in the fall or work for him in the general election campaign. Worse, many of them stayed home on election day. Humphrey came within striking distance in New Jersey, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, and California, but he fell short. Think of the terrible consequences that followed: the Cambodian bombing, 25,000 additional dead Americans in Vietnam, Spiro Agnew as Vice President, reactionary Supreme Court judges, and perhaps worst of all, the "Southern Strategy", as Nixon moved to the right to grab the Wallace voters. When George McGovern was destroyed in 1972, we saw the end result of giving Nixon the power to do all this. Ever since '68, the Democrats have faced an uphill struggle, and one that could have been avoided if they all had forgotten their anger and worked for, given money to, and voted for Humphrey. That's the real consequence of "ideological purity."
We saw a similar catastrophe in 2000, as the Nader voters foolishly withheld their support from Gore (97,000 in Florida alone) and made the election close enough for Bush, Cheney, and Rove to steal by way of what can only be called a right-wing coup d'etat. Do I REALLY have to remind you of all the hideous consequences of that coup? I think not.
Now, we have "purists" in the party who declare they will not vote for Hillary if she is nominated. They are willing to let a dangerous fascist like Giuliani or a two-faced liar like Romney seize power other than violate their "principles". They object to this policy of Clinton or that policy of Clinton, and so are prepared to plunge this country into a THIRD BUSH ADMINISTRATION. And such people think of themselves as "good"!! It's enough to make me go nuts.
Let me tell ya, pal, John Kerry wasn't my first choice in 2004, but I worked my heart and soul out for him, and in Wisconsin, a team of fantastically dedicated people (my contribution was very minor compared to many up there) won the state for Kerry. When Democrats put aside their differences, they WIN. When they get in a huff and decide to stay home, they LOSE. And in losing, they allow the radical right wing criminals to drive this country into the abyss. They allow the neocons to stir up insane wars. They allow the Theocons to destroy church-state separation. They allow fanatics to wipe their ass on the Bill of Rights. That's what happens when we fail to pull together.
Hillary is not my choice. I'd love to see Al Gore as our nominee, or failing that, John Edwards. But if Hillary is the nominee, I want to make a few things clear to all of you:
I WILL GIVE MONEY TO HER CAMPAIGN.
I WILL REGISTER PEOPLE TO VOTE WHO ARE FOR HER.
I WILL WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR FOR HER.
I WILL CAMPAIGN FOR HER DOOR TO DOOR, BY PHONE, AND OVER THE INTERNET.
I WILL PASS OUT OR MAIL OUT LITERATURE FOR HER.
I WILL GIVE PEOPLE RIDES TO THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.
I WILL VOTE FOR HER AND ROUND UP STRAY VOTERS WHO HAVEN'T VOTED YET.
Because, you see, I fully understand the basic premise here: A Republican victory in 2008 will push our country closer to its death and will have the most terrible consequences for the whole world. It will vindicate Karl Rove. It will mean letting neocon psychotics like William Kristol continue to drive us toward disaster. It will allow the religious fundamentalists to continue to ride roughshod over everyone else. Hillary is not my choice, but she is so much better than ANY Republican that I will have no moral or ethical choice but to go all out for her. If Hillary is our nominee, I will be 100% on her side.
Got it?
I'm old enough to remember 1968, back when I was a teenage member of the Dark Side. Richard Nixon, facing a split conservative movement (Wallace to his right), won by the narrowest of margins. Hubert Humphrey wasn't the ideal candidate in the eyes of many Democrats, and a lot of them either didn't contribute money to him in the fall or work for him in the general election campaign. Worse, many of them stayed home on election day. Humphrey came within striking distance in New Jersey, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, and California, but he fell short. Think of the terrible consequences that followed: the Cambodian bombing, 25,000 additional dead Americans in Vietnam, Spiro Agnew as Vice President, reactionary Supreme Court judges, and perhaps worst of all, the "Southern Strategy", as Nixon moved to the right to grab the Wallace voters. When George McGovern was destroyed in 1972, we saw the end result of giving Nixon the power to do all this. Ever since '68, the Democrats have faced an uphill struggle, and one that could have been avoided if they all had forgotten their anger and worked for, given money to, and voted for Humphrey. That's the real consequence of "ideological purity."
We saw a similar catastrophe in 2000, as the Nader voters foolishly withheld their support from Gore (97,000 in Florida alone) and made the election close enough for Bush, Cheney, and Rove to steal by way of what can only be called a right-wing coup d'etat. Do I REALLY have to remind you of all the hideous consequences of that coup? I think not.
Now, we have "purists" in the party who declare they will not vote for Hillary if she is nominated. They are willing to let a dangerous fascist like Giuliani or a two-faced liar like Romney seize power other than violate their "principles". They object to this policy of Clinton or that policy of Clinton, and so are prepared to plunge this country into a THIRD BUSH ADMINISTRATION. And such people think of themselves as "good"!! It's enough to make me go nuts.
Let me tell ya, pal, John Kerry wasn't my first choice in 2004, but I worked my heart and soul out for him, and in Wisconsin, a team of fantastically dedicated people (my contribution was very minor compared to many up there) won the state for Kerry. When Democrats put aside their differences, they WIN. When they get in a huff and decide to stay home, they LOSE. And in losing, they allow the radical right wing criminals to drive this country into the abyss. They allow the neocons to stir up insane wars. They allow the Theocons to destroy church-state separation. They allow fanatics to wipe their ass on the Bill of Rights. That's what happens when we fail to pull together.
Hillary is not my choice. I'd love to see Al Gore as our nominee, or failing that, John Edwards. But if Hillary is the nominee, I want to make a few things clear to all of you:
I WILL GIVE MONEY TO HER CAMPAIGN.
I WILL REGISTER PEOPLE TO VOTE WHO ARE FOR HER.
I WILL WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR FOR HER.
I WILL CAMPAIGN FOR HER DOOR TO DOOR, BY PHONE, AND OVER THE INTERNET.
I WILL PASS OUT OR MAIL OUT LITERATURE FOR HER.
I WILL GIVE PEOPLE RIDES TO THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.
I WILL VOTE FOR HER AND ROUND UP STRAY VOTERS WHO HAVEN'T VOTED YET.
Because, you see, I fully understand the basic premise here: A Republican victory in 2008 will push our country closer to its death and will have the most terrible consequences for the whole world. It will vindicate Karl Rove. It will mean letting neocon psychotics like William Kristol continue to drive us toward disaster. It will allow the religious fundamentalists to continue to ride roughshod over everyone else. Hillary is not my choice, but she is so much better than ANY Republican that I will have no moral or ethical choice but to go all out for her. If Hillary is our nominee, I will be 100% on her side.
Got it?
6 comments:
Will you come back to IL and drive us to the polls. ;)
Illinois in November? I don't think I can!
Joe:
I must have missed it... Is Barack too inexperienced, or you don't like him because??? I'm not sure what I really feel about him, but I do know that his charisma can unite the country like no other, or at least since certain politicians from a foregone era.
I have nothing against Barack and will support him to the hilt if he's nominated. But my heart belongs to Gore first, and then to a truly progressive John Edwards.
Wow I have not read this blog in awhile. Joseph I must have missed your move. I guess that you probably posted it on the blog. I will have to read back articles.
On this one, I am shocked to think that America will "Die" if another Republican is elected. Our founding fathers set up this republic to prevent that and it has lasted about 230 years. Presonally, I hope the Senator Obama wins. Maybe Illinois will finally see some money enter our state from him.
We are in the hands of such dangerous radicals right now that even the Founders could hardly have anticipated the depth of our peril. The Administration is thinking of expanding the war to Iran and Syria. And the majority of our national debt has come under Republican presidents. Yes, our very survival demands that these people be removed from office.
Post a Comment