I humbly apologize for all of the nasty things I blogged about you during the primaries.
Yes, you might have been polarizing. Yes, you might have energized the Republican voters. I still think those things were true. You might have even lost, but given the melt-down of the McCain Campaign and the financial collapse of the Fall of `08, maybe, maybe not.
But I admit, now, that you would have been a better president than the "post-partisan" chucklehead we now have. Yes, he is better than George W. Bush. Being better than Bush is like hurdling over a chalk line.
I was wrong about you. I am so sorry.
Purple Rain
1 hour ago
9 comments:
For all the jokes about Hillary having balls...well, she really does.
Sexist politics or not, we need a pragmatic woman in office to clean this shit up.
When I think of all the racist shit I've seen and heard since 18 months ago, I have to wonder how entertaining it would have been for Hillary to get in. All those same motherfuckers would have started out just as hateful...
...and then they would find things rather cold and lonely in bed.
But don't forget that Hillary's husband was the king of preemptive surrender to angry wingnuts, except when it came to saving his own ass. Remember welfare reform? The Defense of Marriage Act? The overturning of Glass-Steagall?
OK, maybe Hillary would have done better than that on most domestic issues. Which might have partly made up for the fact that she would have appointed her very good friend John McCain as secretary of defense.
I don't blame you for being deeply disappointed with Obama. But don't put rose-colored glasses on when looking at the alternative.
Never could figure out why people continue to hate the Clintons. They were never our enemy but our side was not smart enough to figure that out even to this day.
my vote in the primaries is looking better every day.
she wouldn't be trying her best to please people who would never vote for her, that's for sure
Hillary's problem was that inevitability is not a campaign, and that's all she ran on -- inevitability. It worked for George W. Bush in 2000, but GWB had four times the money that John McCain had in 2000, which made a *huge* difference.
In the end, Obama simply ran a tighter campaign than Hillary. His campaign was focused, coherent, had cohesive messaging rather than jumping all over in a "flavor of the day", and was *not* characterized by the infighting and divisiveness that characterized Hillary's campaign, which was a soap opera of campaign operatives squabbling for power and stabbing each other the back with leaks in the press. Obama's campaign simply clicked along on all cylinders where any squabbling or infighting happened behind closed doors and not in the press, and his campaign ended up pounding inevitability into the dirt in the end.
So I'm not so sanguine about Hillary being a better President. I liked her policies better during the campaign -- I especially heaped praise on her health care plan, which allowed everybody to buy into the same plan that Congress is covered by -- but she just wasn't able to execute. I see no reason to think she could have executed any better *after* election than she did before it.
-Badtux the Backward-looking Penguin
Was going to comment but got carried away, so I just blogged about it instead.
I was on the Hillary side of the left blog primary battle. So it's great to read an apology like yours. I hope to see more like that.
I just noticed that I'm on your blogroll and I'll be reciprocating momentarily.
Mad Kane
While Steve and BadTux make good points here, and Mule Breath did in his blog post, I have been very impressed by Hillary's work as Secretary of State.
I think she would have tried as hard as Obama to be bipartisan, but once it became clear to her that the Republicans were having no part of it, she would have started shoving it up their ass and breaking it off.
Kane, thank you. I enjoy your blog.
Post a Comment