POLITICS AND NATURE

Round One: Overplayed and Misunderstood

The Democratic debate started with sparring between Obama and Clinton. Much has been written about all of this and anyone who has started paying attention will most likely have heard of the fog that was the first ten minutes of the debate. Edwards got in a bit later on the Hillary attack and he was quickly shut down. Biden, Richardson, and Dodd, each took the opportunity to remind the two attackers of the fact that people don’t want to hear their incessant crying over their supposed status as near presidents. As did the crowd, who boo'd both Obama and Edwards.

It must be a crushing blow to be known forever as one of the close contenders. Howard Dean’s bizarre, eerie, and just darn weird scream must go off in his head every once in awhile, waking Mrs. Dean with a panic before she understands that it is just Howard reliving what will forever be the most terrifying and ignorant moment of his life. It is just so funny to hear him wail in the madness of being that close to the presidency and, if anyone chooses to listen again, you can almost hear his hopes and dreams fly out through that microphone.

Imagine Dean sitting at home for the days and months that would follow, hearing his own voice, or the guttural howl of whatever demon possessed him at the time, over and over and over again. Knowing that whatever chance he had to shape the nation in his image was lost forever in a single moment of bad judgment and downright odd behavior.

An entire nation thinking this man would simply lose his mind on a summit somewhere or freak out from a serious acid flashback while hovering over mainland China in Air Force One and ordering an all out assault on the Commie bastards, “No War” slogans be damned, hit ‘em with all we got Howard. There is not much that can match the shrill sound of Howard Dean’s voice coming over the radio, or the TV or whichever of the hundreds of places it was played repeatedly, ad infinitum. It has to be one of the funniest moments in national electoral history.

Debates at this time in an election year bring out the best or the worst in people. A candidate up against the ropes is not a pretty sight. John Edwards ran on the message of being positive in 2004 and it got him a long way. Now, it looks like he can see the writing on the wall and it is not friendly words. It is saying ‘two time loser’ and he can’t get it out of his head. He just can’t figure out how to make up that last little bit. Just a few more points in Iowa or New Hampshire and maybe a win in South Carolina and he could be the nominee or, at worst, the number two, the V.P., the opportunity to take Cheney out at the knees.

This, of course, would be a terrible mistake for either Hillary or Barack to have an untested trial lawyer as their running mate. It worked for Kerry because Kerry had the experience and the history, albeit one that got distorted by a fierce and monstrous opponent with no emotional ties whatsoever to things like truth and honesty, in the general election.

 

The Winners Are...Or Should Be:

Biden-Richardson would be the ticket to bet on if there had not been such an unusual year with a former first lady and an extremely intelligent and well spoken first term senator from Illinois who took the 2004 convention by storm and who has rocketed to what is essentially super-stardom. Anyone who saw Barack back in 2004 knows what he can do. And, Hillary’s lead (36%) is lowering, according to CNN, to only 14% over Barack Obama (22%) who, in turn, is only 9% above Edwards (13%) who’s only 1 point ahead of Richardson (12%). Biden, Dodd, and Kucinich are in single digits.

Enough of polls. They are not to be trusted. They pervert the system and influence people up to the day of the election. Polls offer a method by which to gauge people’s thoughts and ideas, which should be taken account of when governing but not during election time because folks are still making up their minds. That being said, people like President GW Bush are idiots who claim not to make decisions based on polls. There is a time for leadership and there is a time for listening. Somehow, when the second part of that equation gets left out, the people lose.

OK. Back to the debate. The presidential hopefuls offered visions of the future based on ending the occupation in Iraq, energy independence, social security, immigration, education, trade, and Supreme Court justice appointees. There is a vast gap between this group of individuals and those on the Republican side. The issues stated above are serious and require leadership.

Of those in contention, Hillary won hands down. She is getting spit on by everyone for not saying she’ll end the war immediately, but she is saying that she will do what she can with the advice and consent of not only the Congress but the generals as well. Some people may need to be reminded that the Congress is, after all, the representation of the public at large.

If anyone really wants to pay such close attention to every bill that comes up for a vote and every issue making its way through the public debates, let them know, I’m sure they’ll give you all the information you can handle.

Hillary also said she would form and work with a bi-partisan commission to work on the issues of social security and Medicare. That is what is needed. These Republicans who want to hide their heads in the sand, trust the private sector, and leave regular folks to their own devices so the government can control vast amounts of wealth through some sort of personal accounts ceding control over the nation's retirement to the greed mongers on Wall Street are living in fantasy land. They make the do nothing Congress seem productive by comparison. Nothing will be done on a partisan basis.

Nothing will be done by Dennis Kucinich either but he sure is a fun little guy to have at the debates. Barack claimed that certain things were off the table. I hate that table and I wish someone would throw it away, burn it on the ash heap of bad clichés, but that is neither here nor there. That is a subject for another e-mail railing against things like gate being put behind each and every scandal that hits it big. Can these people think of nothing else? Move on.

 

And…..Who Cares?

A good deal of the debate should be pretty well understood by anyone who pays any attention to anything that goes on in society and the political world of the coming election year. They are, after all, Democrats and they are for a comprehensive energy policy, for keeping social security, wary about nuclear power, pro renewable resources and a comprehensive federal strategy to help the nation move in that direction, for ending the war in Iraq, against going to war with Iran, and for diplomacy.

I feel the need to stop there because this is one of the most vital issues facing the nation today. It is also among the largest gaps between the current president and those vying for the follow up act to the righteous right in the White House, and the Democratic contenders. Foreign policy should not be based upon some ridiculous cowboy wannabe thinking that dealing with other nations is like chopping wood with a child on the ranch that daddy bought.

It is popular to believe that the United States has the power and thus can dictate the terms of the debate. This is the strongest nation on earth. No need for its leaders to prance around the world demanding things like a rotten, spoiled child who happens to be the biggest kid on the playground. Grown ups talk to each other. The leadership of the United States, after this debacle of a presidency, needs to open up diplomatic relations with other nations……all other nations. Each of the Democratic candidates promised to do just that. Biden threw in that he talked to Musharraf and Bhutto before President Bush did, that it is important to reduce the rhetoric and that, if W decides to invade Iran, then the Congress should talk of impeachment.

The point is diplomacy is critical. There are threats around the world but to simply strut around the global stage as if there is no need to consult anyone who disapproves of what you do is the height of ignorance and arrogance. This needs to change and the Democrats are aware of that.

As for judicial appointments and the existence of a “litmus test” for judges, the Dems will appoint people who have respect for precedent and who understand that Roe v. Wade is established law, by a 7-2 vote on the Supreme Court. The oddest thing about this came about in 2004, one of the few moments W scored big against Kerry in their debates. W stated categorically that he would not use some sort of litmus test to choose his justices. I was astonished that no one I saw judging that debate or anywhere did it come up that there certainly is a litmus test for conservatives. They will overturn Roe. One more example of the one sided views of American civil discourse.

Immigration went to Richardson. He knows, he is the governor of New Mexico which has a pretty long border with Mexico. Richardson gave driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants in New Mexico. It was a safety issue. But he suggested 1. comprehensive immigration reform, 2. secure boarders, 3. stronger relationship with Mexico, and 4. enforce hiring practices on businesses.

The end result of the Nevada debate? The Democratic contenders are smart, savvy, and experienced. Any one of them, except maybe Kucinich, would be good for the country. These debates are important and people don’t take advantage of them. They show the qualities this country needs such as leadership abilities and how they react under pressure. If anyone would have paid attention to the debates of 2004, who knows where the nation would be now.