Just in case you were wondering

The heart of Lessing's stance is boiled down to an argument/debate I've been involved in and having with some members of the Democratic Party and across the blogosphere since 2003. I've boiled it down to a basic title: Strategy vs Substance.

From the summer of 2003 and all through Howard Dean's presidential nomination campaign, I (and most of Dean's supporters) were constantly berated by hardcore Democrats for our support of the upstart from Vermont. Those brow beatings constantly centered on "electability".

"Electability": that elusive, untouchable "something" that shows the world that only the someone possessing it can be elected one he/she has won the nomination of his/her party.

It is no more real than unicorns or fairy dust, yet it was constantly brought up by naysayers and hand-wringing ninnies from Iowa to Washington to DailyKos; but even more nefarious was that it was the Strategy of interested parties who wanted to ensure Howard Dean's collapse.

Personally, I have pinned that Strategy on the Clintons, specifically Hillary for it was no secret that Hillary's senate tenure was to merely be a stepping stone on her was to a run for the presidency and I submit that she worked hard (behind the scenes) to ensure that Dean "imploded" and Kerry was crowned because she and others knew for a fact that Kerry would inspire no one and that Bush would win a second disastrous term.

Moving forward to 2006, when Tennessee had to sit through the disgusting Harold Ford senate race. Here again, Democrats were asked, no, TOLD to just be quiet while Ford went around bad-,mouthing the left and Democrats in general because it was "what he had to do to get elected."

Hogwash.

And now, here's his fellow DLC member, Hillary Clinton, telling voters that she is the only one who can win all the while she is being told (by voters), "No, you can't" Or better yet, "Maybe, but this guy over here is inspiring me with his credibility and candor."

The worst about her, as Lessing states, is that she is using Rovian tactics. The worst zenith of Strategy in politics. She hopes to strongarm the convention and break the rules and have the FL and MI delegates sat and wrest the nomination away from Obama.

The horror of this situation is that she has hung in there. She has shown her worth. Were she not the ambitious, take-no-prisoners type, she would have already conceded and bowed out with dignity; but the time for that is past, now it can only behoove her (and sadly Obama) for her to stay in till there is absolutely ZERO way for her to make it happen. I fear even then she will go nuclear.

Having said that, I'm thinking Substance will win over Strategy this time.

I'm in my fifties and I can remember back fairly far in my personal experience. It amazes me that few remember the largest riots this country has ever seen was at the Democratic convention in 1968 because it was the Democrats that supported the war in Vietnam. We are now in a similar situation, but for very different reasons, and people want to vote for the same people that had us in Vietnam. I find this absolutely amazing.

Few people remember it was the Democrat Jimmy Carter that got us in a world of Islamic Fundamentalists. I think Mr. Carter has done much better after being president then he did as president. But it was his inaction in the face of Islamic aggression that gave them the foot hold for terror around the globe. I remember the fiasco in Iran well. When we had a Republican in office terror attacks stopped. Kadafi was behind the attack on the jet liner that went down in Scotland. It was Ronald Reagan retaliating against him personally that stopped terror during his presidency. It wasn't until Clinton came into office that terror attacks resumed in full force. There was attack after attack after attack. All over the world embassies, military vessels and the first attack on the World Trade Center happened and Clinton did NOTHING!!! If you haven't noticed folks there are people that want to kill you. Yes you personally and all your good intentions mean nothing to them because your beard isn't long enough or, if you are a woman, you face isn't covered. This sounds just incredible but it is the way it is. Three thousand innocent people were killed in the World Trade Center, a thousand more then at Pearl Harbor, and you are thinking that it is a good thing to put a Democrat in office?? What is wrong with you?? Do you have so much self hatred that you want to die and bring everybody along for the ride?? The Democrats do very poorly at war. Vietnam is the classic example but you can also look at Clinton's attempt at it. He crippled the forces so badly in Somallia that they made a movie about it called "Blackhawk Down." We actually have a good chance to bring a better life to the people that live in Iraq. Just look at what we did for Japan after WW2. If we pull out before we finish the job they will be brought under another dictator that will most likely be even worse the Saddam.

As for the Clinton presidency the video just ignored the fact that the head of the FBI, Louis Freed, was screaming like a mashed cat that there needed to be a Independent Counsel because of the action of the Clinton White House. In the memo he wrote to the Attorney General he said "It is difficult to imagine a more compelling situation for appointing an Independent Counsel" but Janet Reno was in the Clinton pocket and refused to uphold the law. Also I am thoroughly convinced that the events around Monica Lewinsky were a smoke screen for China Gate. Bill Clinton gave away military secrets to China for campaign contributions. To put it another way he sold us out!! Here is a link for a fairly good web site that I googled that has some of the information but not all: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/26/214938.shtml
Mrs. Clinton ran for Senator in New York on how much she was going to do for the Puerto Ricans. What has she done for them?? Absolutely nothing!!! In other words she lies just like her husband. Yea right she had to run under sniper fire. What a bunch of crap.

As for Obama do you really think he went to that church for over twenty years and never heard the "Hate America" speech that was broadcast on the news??? He has a lot of similarities to the Clintons, he will say anything to get a vote then sell you out for his own personal agenda. This is born out by his cutting remarks about the poor working class whites and then back peddling to try and cover it up. I would have had respect for him if he stuck to his remarks and clarified them. But that isn't what he did. He just lied through his teeth to try and make himself look better for the sound bite. Just another two faced scum bag.

Personally I would rather vote for someone that says they are going to do something that I don't completely agree with and then does just that then vote for someone that will say what they think I want to hear then does whatever they want after they are voted in. This is exactly the point that Lawrence Lessing made about the first Clinton democrat not standing by his "principles." Personally I think anybody that says one thing and does another has no principles.

I may sometimes post things that are off topic. In such cases I will:

1) Put in a tag of "offtopic"

2) Not publish it to the front page

Now having said that... I'm not turning anything into a political blog... but I may blog on political things from time to time. I'm certainly only speaking for myself and not the Montana Linux community.

If you don't like that, whoever you might be, sorry.

The video in question does happen to come from a prominent member of the FOSS community... so in one way it is related. Speaking out on software freedom and then trying not to talk about any other politics is kind of silly.

If you turn this into a political blog, I am leaving.