The Perils of Passion

Thanks Anna! You always light my fire. Your style of journalism is a big plus over other lasts page commentators.
Passion may lead to a blinded vision of reality, but passion-less life is pretty dull and sometimes unsavory. The reality lies somewhere in between the extremes. How often we are stuck with such polarizing choices, that the voting public just stays home on election day? Does anyone remember that President Clinton tried to move the Democratic Party toward the center? And all of the naysayers who thought his approach would sound the death knell of the party were proven wrong.
Now, more than ever, those who believe in the leadership of Presidents Jefferson and Jackson should focus on uniting the party and that may mean nominating a third person rather than the current two contenders. But I'm a supporter of the Democratic Party and its "liberal" platform and am willing to support whomever the delegates approve for our Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates.

If Hilary's name was "Harold" we wouldn't be seeing the passion from white Dem females that we've seen so far. The white, Dem females would say that "Harold's" vote for the invasion of Iraq was simply enough to not support "him" against Obama. Barack Obama is a once-in-a-generation candidate and we need him to unite the party this November. He even gets the vote of disillusioned Republicans...when has that ever happened before?!? Unfortunately, Hilary comes with too much baggage. If she becomes the nominee, every Republican, their second and third cousins, and their pets will salivate at the opportunity to vote against her. The Repubs could have Screetch as their nominee in November and they could eek out a win because the independents would drift to the Repub side. The independents are looking for an alternative to the Bush/Rove style of dirty politics and, with Hillary, we get more of the same. If Hillary were to win the election (which she couldn't really against McCain anyway), starting on January 21st, 2009 and until January 21st, 2013 we would have constant bickering between Hillary and the Repubs in Congress. It would be Clinton/Republican Ultimate Fighting Championships round two.

It's my opinion Senator Clinton knew about the race baiting techniques that were used by Bill Clinton. Comments like " now the fun part begins" from Senator Clinton in reference to the nasty part of campaigning were revealing. If Senator Clinton has so much knowledge and experience, what major policies has she put forth? Why is her campaign always trying to get the media to be harder on Obama, when it is her campaign that has fired people and issued numerous apologies? Why don't any of Senator Clinton's supporters seem the least bit concerned about the hoarding of power between the Bushes and the Clintons? Do you think that power gave Ms Clinton an unfair advantage in this whole election process? Do you think she would have jumped out to such a huge lead in superdelegates if her name wasn't Clinton?

Anna, the bit about Obama being light on policy and experience is just more media spin. His Senate experience already includes the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006, the Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, and the 2007 Government Ethics Bill. 5 years ago, when Obama was 41 years old, he stood up against the prevailing winds to oppose the war; it took the rest of us several years to catch up to his judgment. And now Hillary is playing the same old spin game by suggesting that her vote to AUTHORIZE MILITARY FORCE was not a vote for war. Give me a break, it's a fairy tale, electing yet another traditional politician is just too much of a roll of the dice for this country. The times they are a changing!

I think we should all unite to elect Obama. Obama has a better chance of winning in November. He draws from both sides of the aisle, he unites, he is honest, intelligent and I think his youth will be a positive not a negative against McCain. He did not vote for the war or vote to vilify Iran. He has excellent judgment and more legislative experience than Hillary. And unlike Hillary, he is not sneaky and underhanded. She has tried to change the rules twice, once in Las Vegas and then in Florida/Michigan. I have always voted democratic, but I don't know if I can hold my nose and vote for Hillary or not.

Anna, your always liberal-slanted commentary once agaom comes shinging through. You and Jonathan Alter were enough to make me cancel my Newsweek subscription, and I'm an independent. The conservative right is not "anti-immigrant", but "anti-illegal immigrant." Further, saying we were at peace eight years ago makes it sound as if Bush came in with guns blazing after Clinton's eight years of pacifism. Do you recall Clinton's forays into Somalia and Bosnia, as well as his bombing of Iraq (right after he was exposed with Monica Lewinsky)? Do you remember we were attacked on 9-11, and maybe we wouldn't have been if Clinton had gone after bin Laden? State your extreme left case, Anna, but do it without altering history.

I think we should all unite to elect Obama. Obama has a better chance of winning in November. He draws from both sides of the aisle, he unites, he is honest, intelligent and I think his youth will be a positive not a negative against McCain. He did not vote for the war or vote to vilify Iran. He has excellent judgment and more legislative experience than Hillary. And unlike Hillary, he is not sneaky and underhanded. She has tried to change the rules twice, once in Las Vegas and then in Florida/Michigan. I have always voted democratic, but I don't know if I can hold my nose and vote for Hillary or not.

I think "sneakiness" should be another taboo subject that is talked about. in regards to candidates. I think Rudy Giuliani's decision to not do the first primaries, and only go to Florida, was sneakiness, and/or laziness. Floridians told Rudy what they thought of that.
On the other side, I think a "Billiary" presidency is also a sneaky end-run around the constitution which placed a two-term limit on presidents. I fear Americans will tell the Clintons what they think of that particular brand of sneakiness.

If Obama and McCain win, the republicans are going to have a field day comparing the two. They will say that Obama is young, inexperienced, knows nothing about serving his country (in the military). How could he lead this country as commander-in-chief? Since Hillary is a woman, they will have a harder time using that argument without sounding sexist. She is older, and more experienced than Obama. which might be an asset against McCain.

"I will NEVER vote for Hillary " & as a life-long voting Democrat, I wonder if unity can be achieved prior to November? If Superdelegates select Billary, if the party violates pledges not to seat Florida and Michigan delegates, if Howard Dean "strong arms" Barack Obama, voting patterns might be different THIS TIME. African-Americans still remember the southern refrain:"FORGET HELL".

As a full-fledged member of the "I will NEVER vote for Hillary group", I wonder IF the Democrats will be able to unify its base. Remember, African-Americans CONTINUE as the party's most loyal voters. The Clintons have NOW helped us "see through a glass darkly". I am guessing that African-Americans will remember their southern roots and "forget hell".
holding my nose

Democracy is an interesting word right now. With all the talk of superdelegates it add another weird twist to this already whacky political season. It is the Dems who want every vote to count beckoning back to the Florida recount fiasco. However, the Democratic party has created the anti-democractic superdelegate concept to keep "unworthy" candidates from getting the party nomination. In a true deocracy, nobody should be afraid of letting the people speak and be heard. Superdelegates may take control of the process and mute the voice of the everday citizen in the political process. When you break it down to a simplistic level, why would the superdelegate concept make sense and be embraced in a democratic system. We the people should mean just that instead of we the elite and elected hierarchy of the democratic party will have the final word. Superdelegates sound like a way to rig elections in third world countries.

Oh, why don't we just let democracy work itself out? And let people vote? And not worry so much about why we can't just all get together and settle this now like reasonable people? We ARE settling this like reasonable people. We're voting on it. The only way the Democrats will not be united is if Hillary uses some cute maneuver to outwit not only Obama but also the electorate. That is not outside the realm of possibility.

Hillary vote for the war. Was the right vote at the time. Bush Republicans sold the country fear big time.which made the lies believable. This was ALL REPUBLICAN policy. Don't think the lipstick will work on McCain. Who is an accident looking for somewhere to happen.OLD IS OLD. 100 year war. In his dreams will the american people tolerate it. Conservatives are a myth these party is about selling fear here and after life

. My only question as a Democrat is why MUST we choose one or the other? Couldn't we have both - or better all three (I'm including John Edwards.)?

My question too!! God bless you and your front line efforts as a teacher. i can think back on the many many teachers that i pushed to the very edge but stuck in their for me and did more than teach lessons but modeled examples and behaved like i wanted to grow up and be like.

As a recently retired school teacher who spent a life time teaching in an inner city high school in South Los Angeles, I could view Barack Obama as one of my former students. He embodies everything that I tried to teach my students beyond the lesson plan, the state standards and the 83 page course syllabus I dutifully submitted to my administrators about a week before the first day. My only question as a Democrat is why MUST we choose one or the other? Couldn't we have both - or better all three (I'm including John Edwards.)?
During my tenure, I was pressed into service as the senior class sponsor or co-sponsor 4 times. I far preferred forming a team with one or two other teachers and serving as a co-sponsor rather than doing everything myself. This is what the Democrats need to start pushing for. I realize that our Constitution stipulates only one president - but regardless of the title we need to think in terms of team work. Remember united we stand, divided we fall,.

"Anna, How could you say Clinton's vote for war was "appalling," then just leave it at that? I agree with Michael Moore, because of that vote, I am morally prohibited from voting for Clinton"

Politics are more complicated than Red light stop Green light go. If you look for just a few minutes you will see reason to oppose your childs teacher on moral grounds, your hairstylest and this commentary for that matter. i once found myself sitting on the judgement seat of morality until i looked in the mirror and found the biggest problem starring right back at me-and i find it self evident to judge someone on moral grounds is itself immoral. That probably does not make sense because i get way out on a branch but please don't dismiss your future based on a couple isolated incidents in Hillarys past - take the whole picture and try to not focus on the couple flaws. The same for each of us towards each other look over our minor differences and focus on the MAJOR PICTURE.