Barak Obama just came out and said that if he's elected president, he'll withdraw all our troops out of Iraq by the end of 2008. I rather disagree with this approach: we should either stay til it's fixed or else let them cut each others' throats & be done with it. Not sure which one's right, though.... But I'm digressing.
You'll notice a clamoring lack of predictive declarations being made by the triangulating sons of bitches currently being squeezed from the bowels of our two major factions onto the national stage, except for Obama. He may be wrong on many counts, but he makes straight-up statements; he puts his candidacy on the line with highly quotable and therefore attackable statements.
Compared to the soulless pandering jackasses competing with Obama, I'll gladly vote for someone I can trust to do the wrong thing: it's predicatable & manageable. When you can trust someone to do the wrong thing, you can probably trust his reasons for doing so. Kind of a Ron Paul vote of despair (at the fact that I won't get a chance to vote for Paul): as long as we can't have someone good in office, let's at least have someone we can count on.
10 comments:
I agree. It's frustrating and kind of heartbreaking that most of the candidates (from both parties) talk a slippery talk, without giving voters a real idea of where they actually stand. One day they're pro-choice, the next they're shimmying to an anti-abortion stand (in Guiliani's case). And don't get me started on Hilary. So many empty promises and compromises, just in the name of getting elected.
Obama is the only one who makes independent *statements* on a regular basis. At least he'll say what he thinks and take the hits that come with it. At least he's actually *saying* something.
Well, and Ron Paul. But the Republicans will never let him have the nomination.
Usually Lemur I agree with you but I can't help but shake my head at this one..
Your point about someone you can trust to do what they say is valid and important. But you'd rather vote for someone you can trust to do the WRONG thing? That makes no sense..
Consistency and reliability become less important to me when I know that the person is going to reliably pick the wrong outcome.
Um, and why do you think Mr. Obama is not just making this statement to court the hard left voters? Yes, he's doing this consistently, but when you look at who is left for him to pick and conquer as his voter base, this step is just one in many.
It's not this individual statements: he's made some other ones as well regarding nukes & Pakistan. Better a consistent opponent than a slippery weasel-y one.
Look at it this way: if you had to have someone in office, would you rather have someone you can predict and prepare against, or someone who's just as likely to run on your issues as theirs? And with "friends" like the Republicans selling us out to the fundamentalists and corporatists (capitalists are fine, I mean corporatists specifically), I'd rather have a dependable opponent any day.
Okay, that was not that clear form you initial post...or I am just not that subtle...:-) Thanks for the clarification...Still don't think I'd even remotely consider him, given what I know about whom he's trying to appease,though. The question would be if he's in power,whom he's bringing with him, and how can you get them out of there...? I've seen those in power, Jim, and they ain't pretty for this country. But again, I am told I see _very_ black and white on this...:-)
Eh, they're all scorpions in a bottle, as far as I'm concerned.
Best to have as many opposing factions as possible in power so that they can all cancel each other out.
I wish my countrymen in Hungary would learn that...:-)
Well, I think Bush is perfectly predictable, and so by your logic is the perfect president. Lord knows every time I see him talk about doing something I plan for the worst and I'm never ever disappointed. :)
In a way, yes, it is good to have a quantity you can deal with and know how to handle assuming you should have to live like that in under a constitutional republic.
Which I think is absolutely bogus.
I like Ron Paul and I like Barack Obama because both speak their mind and appear to actually...gasp!..think from time to time without 100% sticking to pre-scripted statements that say nothing and only cement more lies and waste of precious oxygen. I used to like McCain for the same reasons and still keep hoping that deep inside he's just changing to burrow into the party and destroy it from within when he returns to his old self and ways of government.
Audacity of hope indeed.
"stay til it's fixed". HAHAHAHAHA! No, seriously (wipes tears from eyes) you'll be waiting a loooong time if you're waiting for peace in the Middle East.
Post a Comment