Time for a Quickie

suziriot.jpgI’m back and have to get some ranting done, because ooohhh doggie am I pissed. I’ve only got time for a quickie, though.

First of all, fuck you right in the ear Bill Kristol. You are a hypocritical, self-righteous, smarmy, condescending, sexist sack of shit. “It’s the tears. She pretended to cry, the women felt sorry for her, and she won.” He also said that “the women like that” and so they voted for her. I don’t know about you, but I always vote with my tear ducts. And my vagina. Sen. Clinton has both, so she has my vote! (BTW, exactly who are The Women?) Again, Fuck. You.

This one is for mi amigo en Panama, Kelso, and all of his naysayers when he (rightly) expresses his opinion that Sen. Obama is not about change, not about new ideas, and not about substance. During the Nevada debate, Brian Williams asked Sen. Obama to respond to the ridiculous rumors circulating on the internet about him being Muslim, not pledging allegiance to the American flag, and being sworn in on the Koran. He answered with

“Let’s make clear what the facts are: I am a Christian, I have been sworn in with a Bible, I pledge allegiance and lead the pledge of allegiance sometimes in the United States Senate when I’ve presided… The American people are, I think, smarter than folks give them credit for.”

Okay, so you’ve defended yourself against what are disgusting and racist lies by asserting that you are none of those things. But he completely ignores the opportunity to really do something “audacious” and state that it does not matter if he is Muslim, if he does refuse to say the pledge of allegiance, or if he had been sworn into office with the Koran! Where exactly is the Change in this answer? All he did was assure White America that he’s a good Christian patriot. My name may be Barack Hussein Obama, but don’t worry because I’m a Christian and I love the American flag and the Bible. Why did he not use that widely admired charisma and passion to make the point that being Muslim does not mean being a terrorist. That there is no religious test for public office. That the pledge of allegiance is not required by law and actually is a violation of our civil rights. But no. Obama plays it safe, because he has to be careful not to offend White America, who lives in constant fear of Islam and suicide bombers. This really exemplifies the reason why I can’t support Obama. He talks a lot, but there’s nothing behind it.I believe he’s a nice guy. I believe he’s an intelligent guy. I believe he thinks he has vision and wants change. But I also know that he hems and haws, flounders, listens to bad advice rather than following his own judgment, and is not willing to go out on a limb or take risks to create or inspire change. He is politics as usual. He does not really have the substance or the guts I’m looking for. That’s all I got for now.

Advertisements

~ by Suzi Riot on January 19, 2008.

13 Responses to “Time for a Quickie”

  1. Oh Suzi, that was a nice quickie. Thanks. You just articluated something I have been thinking quite well with that example of Obama’s answer to that question. And, then I heard an interview with Clinton on All Things Considered yesterday and she took the opportunity to diss Obama, avoided her own stance and in the end, when she was being pinned for her own postition, literally spoke the words, “No Robert, I am not saying anything here.” I cracked up laughing and my daughter thought I was weird.

    I knew Kucinich wouldn’t make it to the end, but I had at least expected to vote for him and am torn. I’m starting to think that he or she who calls “Change” loudest may promise the least.

  2. Good points.

    None of them will have the guts you’re looking for.

    God, what a prick Bill Kristol is.

  3. “the pledge of allegiance is not required by law and actually is a violation of our civil rights”

    oh i love that you put this into writing. my stance exactly… obama had a perfect opportunity to actually make a CHANGE and didn’t take it.

    too bad.

  4. With Hillary’s win in Nevada, I wonder what Kristol will say her reasons for the win are this time. I’m so sick of hearing that any woman who votes for Hillary is just because she is a woman. It’s so insulting.

  5. Kristol is a complete jerk at the best of times and an arrogant one at that.

    However, the real meat of your post – and what a fine post it is dear Suzi – is the Obama story.

    I too, along with many others, are wondering the same thing… Just what change will you deliver? And how?

    He is riding a wave that flows from the cult of personality and little else.

    And thanks to the media, Kucinich was completely ignored. Once they got rid of him, John Edwards was wiped off the map. This is really sad and it really makes me VERY ANGRY.

    Not even because of Edwards, but because the media decides who the big two are for the Dems and that is that. So wrong.

  6. If you work for Fox News, you are by definition a sack of shit. And now Kristol gets a gig at the NYT. How wrong do you have to be before you’re discredited?
    Anyway, nice quickie. I have to tell you that I see Clinton and Obama both as corporate tools. Whoever gets nominated will be a corporate tool. And we’ll vote for the Democrat because on the other side we’ve got the fascist death brigade. American politics. Oy.

  7. CDASH:

    Of course, they are both corporate tools. She never hid it. He was never asked, so he pretends not to be by saying he doesn’t take “lobbyist money”. That’s as disingenuous as it gets. He takes a mountain of direct corporate contributions and bundled contributions of corporate officers. Edwards? Same shit, except neither the press nor the people seem to like him much.

    Neither Dennis Kucinich nor Bernie Sanders nor Jim McDermott nor Barbara Lee are ever getting elected President. So, you have a choice of the least worst now and the least worst later.

    That’s not so bad. For example, given that both Clinton and Obama are corporate candidates in a corporate country, which one has accomplished more and can accomplish still more? I’m not worrying about the symbolism. I think it’s Clinton. And it’s not close.

    Should the freaky thing happen and Obama get nominated, I don’t know that I would necessarily vote for Obama over either Ron Paul or Mitt Romney. And as you all know, with Obama against any other Republican, I’m writing in Michael Vick.

  8. I had the same thoughts you did when I heard Obama’s answer to that question. However, as trite as the candidates have made this sound, we do need to change a lot of things about our society. Who do you think will be the most likely to generate a shift in “just the way things are done”? Our choices are now limited to:

    Obama
    Clinton
    Edwards
    Republicans

    In all seriousness, do you think Clinton, Edwards, or any Republican would be better?

  9. My thoughts exactly, Jen. The front runners, if, indeed, they deserve to be called that, are all career politicians. And Clinton ain’t no better except she is unabashedly liberal. For that she gets my respect, even if she doesn’t get my vote.

    As for Obama’s orientation, I, too, think it matters that he didn’t say what YOU say he should’ve said, Suz. I just think it matters for different reasons. Mostly, I think it’s significant because a person’s religious and/or secular orientation certainly affects their policy decisions. More important for me is can I trust the guy when he makes such statements? (That’s because I’m a Christian, conservative, patriot who happens to be white.) And, beyond that, does he share my essential values. I think the answer, in the former case is negligible at best, and in the later case an emphatic no.

    Anyway, I don’t think we should be too surprised by Obama’s answer. This is, after all, politics, which is a “nice” word for getting in power (by any means necessary) and staying in power (as long as humanly possible).

  10. I share cdash’s ire about voting for the lesser of two evils, evil being defined as the ideological opposition.
    Oh the irony.

  11. Jen- If I answer your question honestly, I have to say, “None of the above.”

    Do we truly believe that people who’ve benefited from the Status Quo will do anything to change it?

    Why would/should they?

    In the end, a great deal of the blame rests squarely on our shoulders.

  12. Amen, fairlane.

  13. Freida: That is hilarious. And sad. Kucinich is the only one with the guts to say anything at all. It takes guts to admit that you think you’ve seen UFO’s! I kid because I love. Kucinich was my guy in ’04 and I’ll stick with him until the general. I’ll write him in if I have to!

    Scarlett: See above re Kucinich. But you’re right about the rest of them.

    notsoccermom: Thanks! It’s too bad, I agree. He’s such a disappointment. But they all are in varying degrees.

    maryellen: I am so completely sick of it as well. As if thinking beyond our gender identity is just too complex for women. Even more insulting is the idea that women vote with their emotions. Ugh.

    Fran: Thank you, dear Fran! Kucinich being ignored really, really irks me too. This is exactly why I believe in blogging so strongly. The MSM has become so arrogant that they think it’s perfectly fine for them to control reality rather than report it. We’re the ones keeping it real!

    cdash: You are so depressingly right. It’s the usual suspects with the usual choices. As always, the lesser evil.

    Kelso, I’ve just realized that though we’ve discussed Obama extensively, we haven’t really engaged on Clinton. Based on what I’ve read from you, I think you and I like and dislike the same things about her. Like I said, I’m writing in Kucinich if I have to. Particularly since there’s no doubt that Obama will win my state’s primary. I’m choosing to ignore the Ron Paul/Michael Vick statement, because I like you. For now. ;

    Jen, yes I do think Clinton and Edwards would be better presidents than Obama. A Republican? No. I’ll vote for Obama if he is the nominee and I won’t think that it’s the end of the world. I very much understand what you are saying, though, and I agree that we will definitely end up with the same choice that we always have: the least evil one available.

    Johnny, I actually very much agree with you. He didn’t say what I would have liked him to say and that’s why I’m not voting for him. Not because of this one statement, but because he always disappoints me. He doesn’t live up to his own hype. I agree with you o HRC as well. Values matter, whatever they happen to be. But policy matters to me more. And that’s why I’m not voting for Obama, HRC, or Edwards in the primary.

    Chad, good point. It is ironic, huh! So it has been, so it will be.

    fairlane, the status quo is where even many of those who have not benefited from it want to be. And yes, it is our own fault if we leave ourselves with nothing but bad and worse.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: