This primary season continues to be endlessly fascinating to this pundit. Over the weekend, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama traded barbs over some comments she made. Here's what Hillary said:
"I could just stand up here and say 'Let's just get everybody together, let's get unified.' The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect,"
Now that's more of what I expected from them - especially Hillary the baby boomer. Hillary, actually, is showing signs of imploding. Imagine things from her perspective, though. Here she was, expecting the candidacy to be given to her because she's a woman, and someone else is stealing her thunder. Who is this person, stomping all over her dream? I actually expected more of this reaction from her earlier on, and perhaps we are finally going to see it, because we are talking Hillary's dream here.
See, thing is, in their most recent debate, they were still too civil. Dang, people! This ain't a tea party - you're running for president! The next debate, which I believe will be before Texas' primary on March 4, I want to finally see the head-butting, the face-slapping, and the knee-groining (all in the metaphorical sense, of course) that I've been expecting all along. Will Hillary finally show some signs that she is taking this seriously and stop being so gushy of Obama? Time will tell.
In the meantime, that ol' gremlin Ralph Nader announced that he will be running again. I call him a gremlin because that's how the Dems view him and his 2000 campaign. The Dems felt that Ralphie took votes away from Al "I invented the Internet" Gore that he needed in Florida, and that's why Bush won instead of Gore (and as the Dems put it, "We were then subjected to 8 years of hell". The embellish just a tad, I think). Nader is just a convenient scapegoat, though. Nader didn't lose it for Gore - Gore did that on his own. And the Dems did it as well by picking such an inept candidate that couldn't beat a socially awkward and clumsy George Bush.
On top of that, in 2004 the Dems selected another inept candidate in John Kerry who was just as wooden as Gore. Think about the 2004 election: Bush at that time was still the same socially awkward and clumsy candidate that was in addition a wounded candidate because of his handling of the war. Kerry couldn't beat even a weakened Bush. What this shows is not some sort of Nader jinxing or Karl Rove manipulations, but that the Dems were both blind and stupid so as to pick the same type of candidate a second time around!
I was really hoping that the Dems would crash and burn in 2006 so that they can start over, but nope - Bush's ineptitude finally caught up to him, and the Dems ended up taking over both houses of Congress - thus making them feel emboldened again. And now we are here in 2008, with two contenders that are essentially both of the same left-wing stripe fighting over who is the bigger victim - the woman or the black man. SIGH. There's no blaming Nader this time - he's a non-factor, so if the Dems lose, it will be their own fault.
Well, it's up to me, then. Still no delegates, and with an even less of a chance to win the presidency than even Ralph Nader. However, I am determined, if nothing else, and I still think that you good folks would prefer me over Obama, Clinton, the GOP candidate John McCain, and even Ralph Nader. C'mon, folks - let's make the big dogs sweat and vote for me!
Now With New Videos Embedded! - The latest edition now includes photos and videos! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B085BTCCCD
3 months ago