Will the Next President Be A Teeny Bit Less Corrupt? I Think Yes
It was Eisenhower, a Republican, and the President that corruption-king Nixon served under as VP, who warned America not to go down the road we've taken. In his final address to the nation he warned of the "military industrial complex," a phrase now widely known, practically cliche, but a phrase he coined, and a novel idea and astute observation at the time. Eisenhower was a great war hero, and so coming from his mouth, you'd think we would have listened, but we didn't and we haven't and we're paying for it now. Bush/Cheney are the culmination of everything Eisenhower tried to warn us about in 1961 as he was stepping down.
Oddly enough, John McCain is one of the few people around these days in government who fights against this military industrial complex. Even though I'm not at all keen on another Republican in the White House, I do think having Romney out of the race is cause for relief and celebration today. McCain has gone a bit off the deep end since 9/11, but before that he was heroic in his fight against corruption and greed. Perhaps that guy will come back. I raise that point to say that we may wind up with two nominees this year who at the very least have defined moral centers, instead of one as we had the last few elections (Gore, Kerry), the ones in which you've been witness to. (Dole was a good person, the 96 nominee, even though again I don't agree with his positions. And while I think Clinton was a good President, I'm not so certain about his moral center.)
One of the reasons the conservatives hate McCain so much is his stand on campaign finance reform. While the bill that he co-sponsored with Russ Feingold has been circumvented with new ways of doing the same old thing, he did fight for that, and against his own party. I think that shows character. He has a humane sensibility toward immigrants, which is another reason why they hate him. He doesn't see them simply as cheap, exploitable labor. That really pisses them off.
So I think that now that Romney is out of the race, you'll have that President who is a teeny bit less corrupt. (Unless Huckabee wins, but I don't think that's going to happen. There are stories coming out of Arkansas that cause me concern with regards to his cleanliness in that department. But I think he's probably vying for the VP spot on that ticket now. Of course with McCain's age....)
For all the bad things people have to say about Hillary, there are certain core values she's been fighting for since forever. She stands for many things, but one of those things is a sincere desire to treat children better in this country. While I don't agree with her particular position on healthcare, I believe she's going to care so much about this that she'll get universal healthcare passed. She may have been uncompromising back in 1993 on this issue, but she has proved to be very compromising in the Senate (some say too compromising) and she has proved that she can work with "folks across the aisle" and she has won over the Republican naysayers in her homestate. Therefore, I don't actually think we'll end up with her version of universal healthcare. Instead, I think we'll end up with one closer to what Obama is advocating. However, that's because she would be starting with a more extreme version and compromising inward. Starting with Obama's, I think we'd whittle it all away to nothing.
But I digress into wonkish talk. Which is my point. Hillary confounds people and leaves them cold, but I think that's because she cares so much about the details, and about the cause of equality for women, and many other issues, that she just gets lost in those details. So I think she's a good person, but an aware and knowing politician. So you'll have that less corrupt President with her as well.
Obama has some skeletons in his closet that Illinoisans have been aware of for years, and they may surprise other people as the election nears, but while I think they'll reveal an ambitious young man who did a few things to get ahead that make one question his loyalty to people and his word; none-the-less, I think that his heart is in the right place when it comes to the people as well.
Romney-tron wasn't real. He created himself over and over again in order to get the votes, to be loved, and to fulfill his father's ambition (George Romney, 1968 candidate for the Republican nomination) to be President. I really think that if you gave him John McCain's haircut, it would be revealed across the top of Romney's scalp three numbers: 666. Or maybe at his inauguration his face and that perfect hair would melt to reveal the face of an alien from the planet Xlorbium, and in the middle of his face would be a giant scorpion's tail shaped penis. Something like that. I'm just glad Romney's gone, is what I'm saying.
But I blather. This post started as a response to a response to last night's post, and now I'm "post-that." I need to work on some of my "real" writing, and leave this kind of bullshit to the pundit class.
Oddly enough, John McCain is one of the few people around these days in government who fights against this military industrial complex. Even though I'm not at all keen on another Republican in the White House, I do think having Romney out of the race is cause for relief and celebration today. McCain has gone a bit off the deep end since 9/11, but before that he was heroic in his fight against corruption and greed. Perhaps that guy will come back. I raise that point to say that we may wind up with two nominees this year who at the very least have defined moral centers, instead of one as we had the last few elections (Gore, Kerry), the ones in which you've been witness to. (Dole was a good person, the 96 nominee, even though again I don't agree with his positions. And while I think Clinton was a good President, I'm not so certain about his moral center.)
One of the reasons the conservatives hate McCain so much is his stand on campaign finance reform. While the bill that he co-sponsored with Russ Feingold has been circumvented with new ways of doing the same old thing, he did fight for that, and against his own party. I think that shows character. He has a humane sensibility toward immigrants, which is another reason why they hate him. He doesn't see them simply as cheap, exploitable labor. That really pisses them off.
So I think that now that Romney is out of the race, you'll have that President who is a teeny bit less corrupt. (Unless Huckabee wins, but I don't think that's going to happen. There are stories coming out of Arkansas that cause me concern with regards to his cleanliness in that department. But I think he's probably vying for the VP spot on that ticket now. Of course with McCain's age....)
For all the bad things people have to say about Hillary, there are certain core values she's been fighting for since forever. She stands for many things, but one of those things is a sincere desire to treat children better in this country. While I don't agree with her particular position on healthcare, I believe she's going to care so much about this that she'll get universal healthcare passed. She may have been uncompromising back in 1993 on this issue, but she has proved to be very compromising in the Senate (some say too compromising) and she has proved that she can work with "folks across the aisle" and she has won over the Republican naysayers in her homestate. Therefore, I don't actually think we'll end up with her version of universal healthcare. Instead, I think we'll end up with one closer to what Obama is advocating. However, that's because she would be starting with a more extreme version and compromising inward. Starting with Obama's, I think we'd whittle it all away to nothing.
But I digress into wonkish talk. Which is my point. Hillary confounds people and leaves them cold, but I think that's because she cares so much about the details, and about the cause of equality for women, and many other issues, that she just gets lost in those details. So I think she's a good person, but an aware and knowing politician. So you'll have that less corrupt President with her as well.
Obama has some skeletons in his closet that Illinoisans have been aware of for years, and they may surprise other people as the election nears, but while I think they'll reveal an ambitious young man who did a few things to get ahead that make one question his loyalty to people and his word; none-the-less, I think that his heart is in the right place when it comes to the people as well.
Romney-tron wasn't real. He created himself over and over again in order to get the votes, to be loved, and to fulfill his father's ambition (George Romney, 1968 candidate for the Republican nomination) to be President. I really think that if you gave him John McCain's haircut, it would be revealed across the top of Romney's scalp three numbers: 666. Or maybe at his inauguration his face and that perfect hair would melt to reveal the face of an alien from the planet Xlorbium, and in the middle of his face would be a giant scorpion's tail shaped penis. Something like that. I'm just glad Romney's gone, is what I'm saying.
But I blather. This post started as a response to a response to last night's post, and now I'm "post-that." I need to work on some of my "real" writing, and leave this kind of bullshit to the pundit class.