I have to agree with Bill
This weekend's debate over whether Obama is patriotic or not is more smoke and mirrors. I actually have to agree with Bill Clinton's remarks where he wishes that we had two decent candidates whose credentials were not in question and we could decide merely on the basis of their stand on issues. This is the wish of the majority of American voters. Alas, that will not be the case regardless of who the Democrats choose.
A reader asked in response to an earlier post, what are my thoughts on the 2008 election now. I stand by my original prediction which is that the Democrats will choose Obama as the flavor of the week. He is young, a great speaker, and not white. These make him the favorite of the ruling left wingers in the party. Add to this the fact that he is NOT Hillary, and that pulls in the disenfranchised middle and right of the party. I don't see them choosing Hillary because she is disliked, discredited, and married to Bill.
That being said, I still feel that the country will have a hard time not voting for McCain. There is still rampant racism in many areas of the country and the whole stir over Obama's pastor's remarks show that this will be exploited. The country also tends to be more to the center than Obama and while he has the younger vote, so did John Anderson in 80. They talk more than they vote. It will be interesting, but that's my current take on it.
Thoughts anyone?
2 comments:
Its hard to tell about this election cycle. I am not excited by any of the choices. McCain looks like he will do the least damage. What a wonderful recommendation? Of course I could be wrong ... Hillary or Obama, with their styles and (lack of) experience might not be able to get ANYTHING done, and that would be even less damaging.
It looks like life on this planet is going to get a little bit harder. The golden age of cheap energy is over (at least for a couple decades). It will be interesting to see if attitudes change when true essentials start becoming dear. Will people still demand that "cable TV" is an essential public service that should be price regulated by government when gas is in short supply (i.e. very expensive)? Food shortages are already happening as food growing land is shifted to fuel growing land because it pays so much better. And have you checked your heating bill this winter? Just wait till next year. It might become fashionable to keep the heat down at 55 or 60 through the winter again (I know some that still do that even today).
Its a bit unsettling that we are running so close to the edge with NOTHING GOING WRONG. If Iran explodes or Venezuela implodes when they finish ruining their economy and a major oil producer goes off line, times could get turbulent. Just the situation to have some international affairs lightweights leading the country.
Talking about Venezuela imploding ...
http://www.petroleumworld.com/Ed08050201.htm
"We're moving toward a socialist republic of Venezuela," Chavez said. "Now electricity is for all, the thing that had been out of reach."
But far from electricity for all, there are now shortages — the same kind hitting other industries Chavez has meddled in.
Businesses have been confiscated across the board in Venezuela, amounting to a nationalization of much of the economy. Chavez has taken cattle ranches, sugar farms, steel companies, cement companies, oil companies, ketchup and soda factories, apartment buildings, phone companies, and TV stations, handing many over to the control of his cronies. His government's excuses for the theft have ranged from lack of title deed, idleness, hoarding, strategic value, ownership by the wrong race (read: white) and, in the case of RCTV, the station Chavez shut down last year, "coup-plotting."
...
Chavez's nationalizations have been a failure. They haven't spread the wealth, as promised, but instead have served up the same across-the-board shortages known in every socialist regime.
--------------------------------
Interesting story. Healthcare nationalization anyone?
Post a Comment