Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Shillary Follows the Herd

OK, better late than never. But this is clearly a finger in the wind move, long after many *real* Democratic leaders have come out supporting withdrawal.

This gets to an essential reason why I will never support Hil, Biden, Kerry or any other establishment Democrat in a primary. Leadership is about doing what's right, early, and building a consensus. Like Dean, Pelosi, Feingold.

Name one critical issue Hillary has been in the forefront of, breaking new ground on, taking a stand, throwing down the gauntlet, and defending.

5 Thoughts:

Blogger Demotiki said...


Thanks for expressing exactly what I have thought ever since the start of the 2004 campaign. Although I ended up campaigning for Kerry, I was very upset that he lacked the political good sense and basic character of sticking to what he clearly understood to be correct. He let his ambition win out over his concern for the troops. That's not a good thing. I want a president who rises because he's the cream of the crop, not because he's traded his valued in for short-term political benefit.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 10:59:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

On Shillary: She lost my vote when, months after speaking to one million people on the Mall in favor of choice, she backpedaled because some hack told her to, no doubt.

On this post: It's a damn shame that these folks can't see the difference between "a timetable for leaving Iraq" and "a timetable for succeeding in Iraq so that we can then leave". There's a world of difference, and if people want stupidity, they should stick with Bush.

I happen to be leaning Edwards, but not because he's "clearer." Kerry was crystal clear -- in fact, this post is typical of how well GOP propaganda works (not yours, pawlr, the linked one).

Kerry was not my first choice last time, either, but the point remains that when we have complex issues that require nuanced solutions, we need nuanced answers, usually.

Kerry screwed up by voting the way he did. By the way, Pelosi first distanced herself from Murtha, and then, three days later, embraced him. Kerry's recent G-town speech used almost exactly the same language as Shillary's -- it's a talking point seeping through the Democrats.

Look, we all knew that as soon as some body-count/atrocity tipping point was reached, America would turn against the war. No one could predict what or when, but you had David Brooks out front leading the pack in early 2003 steeling his readership for "atrocities."

As per usual, a bottom-up groundswell has turned our "leaders'" tune. Without Sheehan taking the hits and covering the left flank, without Katrina, without continued malfeasance in Iraq, you'd see nary a Democrat coming out against the war.

That is, the Democrats, as a whole (with many excellent exceptions) are as ends-justify-the-means as any other group of politicians. The neocons were hoping for a short successful war and flowers and candy thereafter in a Friedman-like free-market paradise on the Tigris and Euphrates that supported us, Israel, and sold oil to us on friendly terms, preferably before Saudi Arabia falls. That end would be worth whatever means were used toward that end.

Democrats -- especially those who cravenly voted for this war -- have been waiting on the sidelines. Had this war, wrong as it was, gone well, they would have wanted a piece of Bush's victory. Now that it's a total cluster-fuck (as any child could have predicted in 2002), they want out. Yes, there's some truth to the fact that they weren't given all the info, but if they were naive enough to believe this crew, none of them ought to be dealing with foreign leaders. I didn't see jack shit-all except what those morons told me on TV, and I was more a target than the intelligence committees, and I thought it was total bullshit on the face of it. And I'm not particularly gifted or unique in this regard. Now, we finally have a clear majority that is antiwar.

We did in 1968, I believe, and the war ended five years later.

Don't follow leaders; watch the parking meters, as the Jokerman said. Do it yourself, and they will follow.

Thursday, December 01, 2005 6:02:00 AM  
Blogger Demotiki said...


You are right about the Senate Democrats. However, people seem to forget that 60% of House Democrats voted against the war.

Our political system, like our media, is being destroyed by careerism. Kerry and Shillary voted as their handlers told them to vote. They believed that voting against the war would hurt THEIR futures, and never stopped to think of what voting for the war would do to the futures of tens of thousands of American soldiers.

Dean is the future of the party. He has discovered the simple truth that when you stop lying, people listen. I suspect that he will emerge as one of the more powerful Democrats in a Newt Gingrich kinda way following our House victory in 2006. Let's all pray that he then decides to run for president.


Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:39:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

True about the House Dems. I should have said "those who voted for IWR." They were either naive or careerist or stupid or something else not good.

On Dean, he's probably done, president-wise, but I think he's in a far more powerful, or at least useful, place now: building the next majority over the rest of his lifetime (30-ish years).

Interesting how Kucinich's position on Iraq -- unthinkable in 2003 -- is now right out there. Hilarious.

My main worry is that some dickhead Democrat will be voted in in 2008 and continue this fucked up war a la Nixon and Vietnam.

I think that we'll be well out of Iraq well before then. Before 11/2006 -- count on it.

Thursday, December 01, 2005 10:23:00 AM  
Blogger Demotiki said...

Yeah, I think those coward "cut-and-run" Republicans will put their tails between thier legs and run away from the political liablity that is Iraq. There will be major troop withdrawals prior to Nov. 2006. However, this might not really help the Republicans. You see, if and when they pull our boys out, Iraq will begin to convulse violently as various factions rush in to fill the vacuum. That can't be good for the Administration or their supporters in Congress. On the other hand, if they delay and pull out the troops after midterms, there will undoubtably be insurgent attacks designed to draw attention to Iraq at the worst possible time for the Adminstration.

Anyway you slice it, the Republican party is on life-support and barring some massive strategic error on the part of the Democratic leadership, will be for the forseeable future.

Thursday, December 01, 2005 2:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home