Friday, February 22, 2008

Those Damn Democrats

The Democrats don't ever do anything halfway, do they? If there's quicksand anywhere around, they'll find it and jump in. Bless 'em. It's feast or famine.

The media pundits seem surprised when they make much of the fact that women over Sixty are supporting Hillary Clinton. Well, duh. Of course. We women over Sixty are the ones who fought the good fight for women's rights. We have waited all these years for the Democrats to nominate a woman for the Presidency. The closest we have come, up to now, was Geraldine Ferraro, and we stood by and let her sleazy husband's activities shoot down her chance to become Vice-President.

So, now we have another worthy candidate, who also has a sleazy husband, but who has had the strength and determination to deflect all attempts to be tarred with the same brush he was. She has emerged as the strong, determined wife who stuck by her husband and didn't let him bring her down because she had her eye on her own prize - becoming the first female President of the United States.

She's not perfect, but we're philosophical about it. She may be our last chance to see a woman President in our lifetimes.

And, what do our fellow Democrats do? They bring in another candidate who also represents something we have waited a long time for. For all those years, while we fought for the rights of women, we were also fighting for the rights of people of color. We were captivated by Jessie Jackson and watched him light up the room everywhere he spoke. We celebrated the Civil Rights Movement with the same zeal that we gave to the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment).

Now, we have Barack Obama, a black man who has his own way of lighting up a room. A man we would all be proud to vote for. And, he's ahead. And, we would be satisfied with him as the candidate.

If it weren't for Hillary. So, we're pretty much split down the middle. Why, oh why, can't the Democrats do things one at a time? For all these years, we have hoped for a viable female candidate - OR - a viable black male/female candidate. Now that we have both at the same time, what's a good Liberal Democrat to do? We really can't have them both. It's hard to imagine that either of the candidates would accept the Vice-Presidency.

OK. The handwriting seems to be on the old wall. We'll shed a tear for Hillary (and our dreams) and go to the polls and vote enthusiastically for Obama.

And, we'll hope that there will still be time for us to see the first female President. Hmmmmm. I wonder if Caroline Kennedy has any political aspirations.

10 comments:

Doc said...

I think it may be over for Hillary at this point but I am biased as I have been an Obama supporter from the minute he announced (or sort of didn't deny he was running) Maybe Chelsea will have some political ambitions one day?

Nancy said...

Betty,

The Democrats, as they say, have a talent for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory....

I think the Carl Rove school of thought has been thinking like this:

Promote Barack Obama over Hillary.
Say absolutely nothing against him.
Hope and pray they nominate Obama.

Then with Hillary out of the picture (Thank God, because we have nothing new to throw at her; Whitewater was an expensive bust and Vince Foster is so over), we can use all our stored up "SWIFT BOAT" ammunition against Barack and Michele Obama..

They have all that stuff about him being a Muslim and taking the American flag pin out of his lapel and not holding his hand over his heart at the Star Spangled Banner, and Michele saying that this was the first time in her life she was ever proud of America, and only God knows how much more stuff we don't know about..

They will throw it all at him and ,too late, we will realize that Hillary would have been a much better choice for President..

And they will be laughing all the way to the Inauguration.....

Betty said...

doc: Well, I'll be just as happy to vote for Obama.

nancy: I'm afraid you're right. Actually, I'm afraid that all those young people who turned out for the primaries will decide they've done enough, and they won't show up for the general election. You know how short their attention spans are. lol

Jay said...

I'm actually very surprised that the Dems aren't going to nominate Hillary. The Dems have a long history of nominating people who already have really high negatives and can't get over 49.8% of the vote under any circumstances.

Which describes Hillary perfectly. Although I'm not sure she could ever get as high as 49.8% of the vote anyway. More like 46%.

Joy Des Jardins said...

Barack's been my choice from the beginning. He's inspiring and a positive force that has given so many the hope that has sorely been missing in these last years. He's just a good and decent man....and I think that's becoming more and more apparent.

Annie said...

But wait, I remember Shirley Chisholm in 1972.

Joan said...

Thanks so much for stopping by with birthday wishes. Another year, another large number...sigh.

As for the Democrats, it's the same old story with a new twist. This time they may actually get to implode with too many great candidates instead of too few. Somehow that scenario just seems to define irony.

Betty said...

jay: She hasn't been able to hit the 50% mark yet, has she?

joy: I think he is a decent man. What's not to like?

annie: I remember Shirley Chisholm, too, but the party didn't help her any, or take her very seriously.

joan: Irony is right. And, now, Nader has decided to jump in and try to be the spoiler, again.

patsy said...

don't about me deleting lilly comment. i love for some one to disagree with me. i thrive on conterverstect.

Anonymous said...

Hey Patsy, I see you couldn't use spell check this time. Never disagree with backwoods trailer trash, its like pissing in the wind.