Hillary and Barack, Barack and Hillary
I know that some of you don't like to see too much political stuff on your flist. Feel free to ignore this, if that's the case. I do, however, want to point out that when I bring something political to my LJ, it's because I feel that it's extremely important.
This may be the most pivotal election in our nation's history. There's too much at stake to make a mistake, or to make a vote based on emotions and not issues. If you don't want to read any further, allow me to beg the following:
Please DON'T vote on hearsay about the candidates. Do real research. Ask yourself who can really do the job. Ask yourself who has the experience and the record to back it up, because we can't afford a gamble right now. Ask yourself if your vote balances vision and ideals with practicality and experience in a way that will WORK. Ask yourself if you REALLY researched the issues and the candidates. THEN vote.
For those of you who want to discuss further, click the cut:
It took me a while to decide to whom I would give my vote. That's because I don't make decisions like that lightly. I can't accept any less from myself. In the end, I've settled on Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. Allow me to explain why:
1. Experience. REAL experience. Obama has almost NO experience on the national level. He's only been a US Senator since 2005. He's never been re-elected to national office. Hillary has been in the senate since 2001... and she has already been re-elected on her own. Even though Hillary was "just" the First Lady, she was possibly the most active First Lady in history, taking an active role in foreign diplomacy (something our country NEEDS right now, desperately), domestic policy (presented plans for comprehensive health care reform that we now WISH had passed into law at the time, because we need it NOW), and "special interests" such as education and children's rights (which was her specialty as a lawyer). Even her time as First Lady was used to create real impacts, and real changes. Barack was a city coordinator and a mayor, then in his own state's senate... but when has he dealt with foreign diplomacy? I'll get to that shortly.
2. Self-sufficiency. I bring up this topic to show that the playing field is far more equal between these two candidates than some people would lead you to believe. Many people want to make you believe that Hillary Clinton's success is only due to her husband, and that she was raised with a silver spoon in her mouth. Seriously, until Bill Clinton was elected as President, Hillary was by far the more successful Clinton. She went to college on a scholarship - not her parents' bank account. She went to law school on her own power and money, and is a Rhodes Scholar. I'm not going to deny that Barack Obama has earned his Harvard education and his Bar, but he's not a poor boy from the ghetto who struggled his way to Harvard whilst Clinton had everything handed to her on a silver platter. So, for people who want to vote for Obama because he's closer to "the people", and whatnot... if that's your reason for voting, you should vote for John Edwards, who actually DID grow up in the lower-middle class. Actually... so did Bill Clinton. Not Obama though... no more than Hillary Clinton.
3. Real change or fluffy talk. Hillary has always been a person of action, even if that action is unpopular, if she truly believes that those things will be the best for the people. For example, her complete overhaul of the education system in Arkansas. TRY challenging midwestern/southern conservatives about teaching issues concerning science. Just TRY. It's like going up against a brick wall. Arkansas had the WORST education system in the entire nation; once she finished, it was the best education system in any state south of the Mason Dixon line. That's a HUGE impact.
Obama lists his involvement in the "Annenberg Challenge" on his political resume. It's a group that channels money for education reform. The way he talks about it, you'd think he spearheaded the project. In truth, his name is barely mentioned on the old documents from the time when he was "involved", and analysis of the project by objective sources (Consortium of Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago and others) doesn't show solid evidence that the Annenberg Challenge itself actually was actually responsible for the improvements in the education systems in Chicago. Even more so, there's no evidence that Obama's work with the Challenge had any impact at all.
4. Feasible plans and leadership. Hillary has been presenting a comprehensive, detailed, WORKABLE health-care plan for a long time. In fact, she proposed it HERSELF to the House and Senate when she was the First Lady. Unfortunately, people thought it was "too progressive" at the time. That doesn't mean she didn't try. And her plan could work, now. What about Obama's plan? Well, about two weeks ago, he hadn't outlined anything significant. He simply said that he would be sure that everyone would have/must have health coverage. About a week and a half ago, Hillary outlined her plan in a debate. I went back to Obama's website yesterday... and Hillary's plan, with only a few changes, now appears on Obama's website. Coincidence? More importantly, does he know how to execute that plan? I don't think so. Anyway, in other plans, what about the war? Hillary is the only one who has had experience dealing with military leaders, and her discussions of plans to pull troops is the only one that has MENTIONED working closely with the Generals and taking suggestions and logistics/security plans from them, insofar as those plans fit her approximate timeline. I've been in the Army for SEVEN YEARS. I've planned battle operations and logistics operations. I've watched major training battles/scenarios fall apart because the redeployment/withdrawrel plans were shitty "just get the hell out" plans. People die when you do shit like that. Hillary KNOWS better. She'll get the troops out with the least casualties. Isn't that more important than just getting the hell out as fast as possible?
5. Voting in the Senate. Hillary HAS a voting record. Barack has a wonderful record of voting "present". A ton of his votes in the Senate have been "Present" or "Not Voting", not "yea" or "nay". In other words, he's very good at having NO OPINION. It's really easy not to piss anyone off when you don't take a stand on things, isn't it? Sure, Hillary has irritated a few people... but most people who do anything useful piss off a few people. Rosa Parks pissed off a white man (and subsequently, a lot of people), and she's one of the heroes of history. Barack hasn't irritated too many people, but that's because he hasn't taken any hard stands on controversial issues. And, of course, that's when Barack has bothered to vote at all. He was absent for most of the votes during his first year in the Senate. If I missed work like that, I'd be fired. Oh, and why didn't Barack vote for the war? The Iraq war started in 2003. Barack became a senator in 2005. He didn't vote for the war because he wasn't there yet! And perhaps, just MAYBE, Hillary voted for military action because she didn't want to believe that the President was lying through his teeth. And, in case you guys forgot, MOST of her constituents SUPPORTED the war at that time. She was voting the position of the people she represented! What a concept... a representative who represents. Please people, don't forget what REALLY got us into this war: The lies of the worst president in history - George W. But going back to Barack's record... on the only Iraq War related bills to cross his plate since he became a senator... he is recorded as NOT VOTING.
6. Foreign Relations. The Clintons - BOTH of the Clintons - have excellent records of foreign diplomacy. They've both worked with foreign embassies, creating and maintaining peaceful international relations. Hillary did well in her own right, and you know that Bill has continued to work on foreign relations after his term in office was over. Even though Hilary wasn't the elected official, she WORKED in within her capacity, and gained a lot of experience in that role. Other countries may have snickered at his extramarital issues, but they HATE Bush. Actually, right now, most countries HATE the United States. When I travelled to England over last summer, I noticed how I was treated if I told people I was Canadian, versus American. If I was Canadian!Mijan, I was treated VERY well. If I was American!Mijan, I was given a sort of roll-the-eyes-cold-shoulder. Now, that was just in England. Other countries find us much more deplorable. There's a REAL loathing of America right now, and it will take a LOT of work to fix that. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be an instant boost in foreign relations. Right now, we're hanging by a thread in terms of diplomacy. Just as the First Lady has historically been slotted as an ambassador of goodwill, the first First Gentleman would continue that role in style. Obama doesn't have any real experience in foreign relations, does he?
Oh, wait, let me take this quote from Obamapedia, a pro-Barack website:
"Obama's foreign policy experience includes graduating from Columbia University with a degree in political science with an emphasis on international relations." It also points out that he serves on some "foreign relations sub-committees".
Excellent! I have a Bachelor's degree in Biology, pre-med, and I was in the Beta Beta Beta Biological Honor Society! I'm ready to practice brain surgery! Give me a break. And bear in mind that being on a Senate committee, even if it works on foreign relations, does NOT mean that he's ever actually had a hand in face-to-face diplomatic foreign relations in any sort of stressful situations.
We need real experience in foreign relations right now. Obama doesn't have it.
7. The Economy. It was just a matter of time - recession is upon us. Bush's ass-rape of the country is complete. Bill Clinton actually turned a national SURPLUS in the budget, employment was good, consumer confidence was up, and the economy was doing well. I know Hillary will be fully capable of doing the same. I'm SURE she'll do it. And Barack... is totally untested. Do you want someone who has only dealt with executive power over a budget on a CITY level to jump into the highest office in the land just as we're falling into a recession? If so, you're mad.
8. Wes Clark. What does he have to do with this, you say? Wes Clark was a Four-Star General. The man graduated first in his class from West Point, was a Rhodes Scholar, earned his own way up through the ranks of the Army, and he's a social liberal. Yes, you heard that right, he's a liberal. Ran as a Democratic candidate for President during the primaries in 2004. He was one of the front-runners, too. I met him twice, in person (not just watched him from an audience... I mean I shook his hand and talked to him for several minutes each time... he stood on my chair to address the crowd in the pub... he got some mud on my Gryffindor scarf, actually...). The man is brilliant, and he actually cares. He had some brilliant plans for the country... I wish he'd been elected. But what does that have to do with Hillary Clinton? Just the fact that Wes Clark has endorsed Hillary for President for a long time now. The man has brilliant judgment... I could see him being appointed to the position of Secretary of Defense... and doing AMAZING things for the military in such a role. The military needs a brilliant and FAIR person like him at its head. Oh, and yes, he believes that gays should be able to serve openly in the military without prejudice or persecution, and would work to repeal all legislation against gays in the military. That was one of the big questions I asked him when I met him the first time. From about a foot and a half away, I asked him, eye to eye, what he would do about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". He didn't flinch, he didn't blink, he didn't look aside before answering. He stated clearly and directly, "I will do everything within my power to repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'. For us to deny any American the full rights of citizenship, forcing them to live a lie if they wish to serve, is one of the most un-American things we can do. It's horrible what we're doing to this group of Americans, treating them like second-class citizens, and it needs to stop." I'll never forget a what he told me... or how he never broke eye contact, never hesitated. I asked him other questions, too, and his answers were consistent and intelligent. He's always been consistent and intelligent. And he supports Hillary Clinton. Ask yourself why.
So, that's what I've got so far. If you have information that contradicts any of this, adds to it, or detracts from it, post a comment. Just be sure to give me a reliable source... I research everything regarding the candidates, and I confirm things from a minimum of two independent sources before believing them. Discussion is welcome - but NO FLAMES. (This applies to me AND to anyone who might comment here. Of course, if you post here to support Mike Huckabee, I might suggest you submit to psychiatric evaluation.) If you disagree with me, I'll welcome that, but please discuss with facts, and I'll return the favor. If you give me real, solid reasons to consider changing my mind, and those reasons can be confirmed, you might even change my mind. But remember, I don't take things at face value. I will check your sources. I ask you to check your sources, too. I'll re-check my own sources if there's something questionable. I want EVERYONE to make educated votes this year, including me.
A final note: I'll discuss issues, not race or gender. I'll vote for the candidate that seems to have the best credentials, record, and ability. Regarding race, religion, gender, and the like... I couldn't care less about those things.
This may be the most pivotal election in our nation's history. There's too much at stake to make a mistake, or to make a vote based on emotions and not issues. If you don't want to read any further, allow me to beg the following:
Please DON'T vote on hearsay about the candidates. Do real research. Ask yourself who can really do the job. Ask yourself who has the experience and the record to back it up, because we can't afford a gamble right now. Ask yourself if your vote balances vision and ideals with practicality and experience in a way that will WORK. Ask yourself if you REALLY researched the issues and the candidates. THEN vote.
For those of you who want to discuss further, click the cut:
It took me a while to decide to whom I would give my vote. That's because I don't make decisions like that lightly. I can't accept any less from myself. In the end, I've settled on Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. Allow me to explain why:
1. Experience. REAL experience. Obama has almost NO experience on the national level. He's only been a US Senator since 2005. He's never been re-elected to national office. Hillary has been in the senate since 2001... and she has already been re-elected on her own. Even though Hillary was "just" the First Lady, she was possibly the most active First Lady in history, taking an active role in foreign diplomacy (something our country NEEDS right now, desperately), domestic policy (presented plans for comprehensive health care reform that we now WISH had passed into law at the time, because we need it NOW), and "special interests" such as education and children's rights (which was her specialty as a lawyer). Even her time as First Lady was used to create real impacts, and real changes. Barack was a city coordinator and a mayor, then in his own state's senate... but when has he dealt with foreign diplomacy? I'll get to that shortly.
2. Self-sufficiency. I bring up this topic to show that the playing field is far more equal between these two candidates than some people would lead you to believe. Many people want to make you believe that Hillary Clinton's success is only due to her husband, and that she was raised with a silver spoon in her mouth. Seriously, until Bill Clinton was elected as President, Hillary was by far the more successful Clinton. She went to college on a scholarship - not her parents' bank account. She went to law school on her own power and money, and is a Rhodes Scholar. I'm not going to deny that Barack Obama has earned his Harvard education and his Bar, but he's not a poor boy from the ghetto who struggled his way to Harvard whilst Clinton had everything handed to her on a silver platter. So, for people who want to vote for Obama because he's closer to "the people", and whatnot... if that's your reason for voting, you should vote for John Edwards, who actually DID grow up in the lower-middle class. Actually... so did Bill Clinton. Not Obama though... no more than Hillary Clinton.
3. Real change or fluffy talk. Hillary has always been a person of action, even if that action is unpopular, if she truly believes that those things will be the best for the people. For example, her complete overhaul of the education system in Arkansas. TRY challenging midwestern/southern conservatives about teaching issues concerning science. Just TRY. It's like going up against a brick wall. Arkansas had the WORST education system in the entire nation; once she finished, it was the best education system in any state south of the Mason Dixon line. That's a HUGE impact.
Obama lists his involvement in the "Annenberg Challenge" on his political resume. It's a group that channels money for education reform. The way he talks about it, you'd think he spearheaded the project. In truth, his name is barely mentioned on the old documents from the time when he was "involved", and analysis of the project by objective sources (Consortium of Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago and others) doesn't show solid evidence that the Annenberg Challenge itself actually was actually responsible for the improvements in the education systems in Chicago. Even more so, there's no evidence that Obama's work with the Challenge had any impact at all.
4. Feasible plans and leadership. Hillary has been presenting a comprehensive, detailed, WORKABLE health-care plan for a long time. In fact, she proposed it HERSELF to the House and Senate when she was the First Lady. Unfortunately, people thought it was "too progressive" at the time. That doesn't mean she didn't try. And her plan could work, now. What about Obama's plan? Well, about two weeks ago, he hadn't outlined anything significant. He simply said that he would be sure that everyone would have/must have health coverage. About a week and a half ago, Hillary outlined her plan in a debate. I went back to Obama's website yesterday... and Hillary's plan, with only a few changes, now appears on Obama's website. Coincidence? More importantly, does he know how to execute that plan? I don't think so. Anyway, in other plans, what about the war? Hillary is the only one who has had experience dealing with military leaders, and her discussions of plans to pull troops is the only one that has MENTIONED working closely with the Generals and taking suggestions and logistics/security plans from them, insofar as those plans fit her approximate timeline. I've been in the Army for SEVEN YEARS. I've planned battle operations and logistics operations. I've watched major training battles/scenarios fall apart because the redeployment/withdrawrel plans were shitty "just get the hell out" plans. People die when you do shit like that. Hillary KNOWS better. She'll get the troops out with the least casualties. Isn't that more important than just getting the hell out as fast as possible?
5. Voting in the Senate. Hillary HAS a voting record. Barack has a wonderful record of voting "present". A ton of his votes in the Senate have been "Present" or "Not Voting", not "yea" or "nay". In other words, he's very good at having NO OPINION. It's really easy not to piss anyone off when you don't take a stand on things, isn't it? Sure, Hillary has irritated a few people... but most people who do anything useful piss off a few people. Rosa Parks pissed off a white man (and subsequently, a lot of people), and she's one of the heroes of history. Barack hasn't irritated too many people, but that's because he hasn't taken any hard stands on controversial issues. And, of course, that's when Barack has bothered to vote at all. He was absent for most of the votes during his first year in the Senate. If I missed work like that, I'd be fired. Oh, and why didn't Barack vote for the war? The Iraq war started in 2003. Barack became a senator in 2005. He didn't vote for the war because he wasn't there yet! And perhaps, just MAYBE, Hillary voted for military action because she didn't want to believe that the President was lying through his teeth. And, in case you guys forgot, MOST of her constituents SUPPORTED the war at that time. She was voting the position of the people she represented! What a concept... a representative who represents. Please people, don't forget what REALLY got us into this war: The lies of the worst president in history - George W. But going back to Barack's record... on the only Iraq War related bills to cross his plate since he became a senator... he is recorded as NOT VOTING.
6. Foreign Relations. The Clintons - BOTH of the Clintons - have excellent records of foreign diplomacy. They've both worked with foreign embassies, creating and maintaining peaceful international relations. Hillary did well in her own right, and you know that Bill has continued to work on foreign relations after his term in office was over. Even though Hilary wasn't the elected official, she WORKED in within her capacity, and gained a lot of experience in that role. Other countries may have snickered at his extramarital issues, but they HATE Bush. Actually, right now, most countries HATE the United States. When I travelled to England over last summer, I noticed how I was treated if I told people I was Canadian, versus American. If I was Canadian!Mijan, I was treated VERY well. If I was American!Mijan, I was given a sort of roll-the-eyes-cold-shoulder. Now, that was just in England. Other countries find us much more deplorable. There's a REAL loathing of America right now, and it will take a LOT of work to fix that. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be an instant boost in foreign relations. Right now, we're hanging by a thread in terms of diplomacy. Just as the First Lady has historically been slotted as an ambassador of goodwill, the first First Gentleman would continue that role in style. Obama doesn't have any real experience in foreign relations, does he?
Oh, wait, let me take this quote from Obamapedia, a pro-Barack website:
"Obama's foreign policy experience includes graduating from Columbia University with a degree in political science with an emphasis on international relations." It also points out that he serves on some "foreign relations sub-committees".
Excellent! I have a Bachelor's degree in Biology, pre-med, and I was in the Beta Beta Beta Biological Honor Society! I'm ready to practice brain surgery! Give me a break. And bear in mind that being on a Senate committee, even if it works on foreign relations, does NOT mean that he's ever actually had a hand in face-to-face diplomatic foreign relations in any sort of stressful situations.
We need real experience in foreign relations right now. Obama doesn't have it.
7. The Economy. It was just a matter of time - recession is upon us. Bush's ass-rape of the country is complete. Bill Clinton actually turned a national SURPLUS in the budget, employment was good, consumer confidence was up, and the economy was doing well. I know Hillary will be fully capable of doing the same. I'm SURE she'll do it. And Barack... is totally untested. Do you want someone who has only dealt with executive power over a budget on a CITY level to jump into the highest office in the land just as we're falling into a recession? If so, you're mad.
8. Wes Clark. What does he have to do with this, you say? Wes Clark was a Four-Star General. The man graduated first in his class from West Point, was a Rhodes Scholar, earned his own way up through the ranks of the Army, and he's a social liberal. Yes, you heard that right, he's a liberal. Ran as a Democratic candidate for President during the primaries in 2004. He was one of the front-runners, too. I met him twice, in person (not just watched him from an audience... I mean I shook his hand and talked to him for several minutes each time... he stood on my chair to address the crowd in the pub... he got some mud on my Gryffindor scarf, actually...). The man is brilliant, and he actually cares. He had some brilliant plans for the country... I wish he'd been elected. But what does that have to do with Hillary Clinton? Just the fact that Wes Clark has endorsed Hillary for President for a long time now. The man has brilliant judgment... I could see him being appointed to the position of Secretary of Defense... and doing AMAZING things for the military in such a role. The military needs a brilliant and FAIR person like him at its head. Oh, and yes, he believes that gays should be able to serve openly in the military without prejudice or persecution, and would work to repeal all legislation against gays in the military. That was one of the big questions I asked him when I met him the first time. From about a foot and a half away, I asked him, eye to eye, what he would do about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". He didn't flinch, he didn't blink, he didn't look aside before answering. He stated clearly and directly, "I will do everything within my power to repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'. For us to deny any American the full rights of citizenship, forcing them to live a lie if they wish to serve, is one of the most un-American things we can do. It's horrible what we're doing to this group of Americans, treating them like second-class citizens, and it needs to stop." I'll never forget a what he told me... or how he never broke eye contact, never hesitated. I asked him other questions, too, and his answers were consistent and intelligent. He's always been consistent and intelligent. And he supports Hillary Clinton. Ask yourself why.
So, that's what I've got so far. If you have information that contradicts any of this, adds to it, or detracts from it, post a comment. Just be sure to give me a reliable source... I research everything regarding the candidates, and I confirm things from a minimum of two independent sources before believing them. Discussion is welcome - but NO FLAMES. (This applies to me AND to anyone who might comment here. Of course, if you post here to support Mike Huckabee, I might suggest you submit to psychiatric evaluation.) If you disagree with me, I'll welcome that, but please discuss with facts, and I'll return the favor. If you give me real, solid reasons to consider changing my mind, and those reasons can be confirmed, you might even change my mind. But remember, I don't take things at face value. I will check your sources. I ask you to check your sources, too. I'll re-check my own sources if there's something questionable. I want EVERYONE to make educated votes this year, including me.
A final note: I'll discuss issues, not race or gender. I'll vote for the candidate that seems to have the best credentials, record, and ability. Regarding race, religion, gender, and the like... I couldn't care less about those things.