Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Why I'm Taking on Hillary Clinton

By Jonathan Tasini, AlterNet. Posted December 5, 2005.


Challenging the as-of-now presumed Democratic presidential nominee sends the message that 'Republican Lite' is no longer an option for an opposition party.
Advertisement

Imagine walking into the ballot booth and casting your vote without having to hold your nose. Imagine being able to vote for what you really believe, instead of telling yourself (yet again) that the best you can do is pick the lesser of two evils, including voting for someone who is a supporter of the war in Iraq. I can imagine having a real choice -- and it's the reason I'm challenging Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for Senator from New York.

My campaign will give New York voters a voice and a choice, for the differences between the incumbent and myself are stark and wide. She supported the war in Iraq from the beginning, and even now, after the deaths of 2,100 Americans and countless thousands of Iraqis, and the waste of hundreds of billions of dollars, still holds a position not very different from that of George Bush (find a "winning" strategy, then withdraw troops ... sometime.)

She still says NAFTA was a good thing. You remember NAFTA: it cost thousands of Americans their jobs, threatened the environment and encouraged big corporations to move jobs to countries with dismal labor rights. She has never advocated for real health care reform, like universal health care, because that would have meant taking on the powerful drug and insurance company lobbies. And she receives campaign cash from big corporate donors, including Wal-Mart.

My background, my positions and my beliefs are a mirror opposite. I am a long-time labor leader, organizer and activist, who will draw financial support in small amounts from many thousands. I am a patriot who has firmly and vocally opposed the war -- who thinks that real homeland security means bringing the troops home now -- and who believes that our economic future should not be determined by an ideology of corporate protection that moves good-paying jobs to countries that desecrate the environment and abuse their workers, and which leaves hardworking American men and women to face a dead-end future. I support providing Medicare to all Americans, so good health becomes a right, not a luxury for those who can afford it.

I also stand in challenge to the politics of business-as-usual -- and to the Democratic Party which has a chance to regain power, if it has the courage to put forth a message and agenda that is something more than Republican-lite. I have talked to people throughout New York State and the country, and they are hungry for that vision. My campaign offers progressives a chance to say their votes cannot be taken for granted, simply because a Democratic Party candidate is the "less bad" option. It gives us a chance to pursue our conception of what America should be.

Can I win this race? It's always tough to take on an incumbent. But whatever happens, I hope to leave behind a network of activists committed to taking back the country and electing leaders who have the nerve to stand against corporate abusive of power and those who would impose an American empire on the rest of the world. And I do not believe victory is impossible. The late Paul Wellstone's slogan was "vote for what you believe in," a slogan that is the clarion call for If the people of New York do that, we can win. The time has come to stop accepting second best. I've worked for a better world my entire adult life, and I still believe it's within reach.

Digg!

Jonathan Tasini is the president of the Economic Future Group and the author of two books, including They Get Cake, We Eat Crumbs.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hillary as a choice
Posted by: TKO on Dec 5, 2005 12:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary wouldn't be a good candidate for president for several reasons. I personally don't have anything against women in politics. I don't feel they could screw things up any more than men have and if a women politician has a clear record of supporting things I agree with, I would vote for her. However, due to the present state of the government and the urgent need to wrest corrupt Republican control from all parts of the government, the Democrats need a presidential candidate that everyone would support. Some people will not vote for a woman, period. We don't need another Ralph Nader type situation were there was a percentage of people that might have voted for Kerry but they voted for Nader. We need to make sure that there is no reason for a split in Democrat votes because some people won't vote for a woman. Additionally, she supported Bush's War at the start and still supports it now. Has she decided on the state she wants to live in? I would also would have more respect for her if she had given Bill his walking papers for his repeated affairs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hillary as a choice Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» Voting out of fear... Posted by: turil
Sounds good to me
Posted by: ljsullivan1166@earthlink.net on Dec 5, 2005 3:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm with you, Mr. Tasini. I have resolved to never again vote for 'the lesser of two evils'. If there is no candidate I can enthusiastically support, then I will vote for none in that field.


I have been hoping that some candidates would emerge who will take a principled and democratic stand against the politics of the Washington neo-libs and neo-cons; they are all in bed together.


I think at this point it doesn't matter if the candidate is male or female, black, white, brown or purple -- just let us have a candidate with INTEGRITY and a CLEAR VISION of what America is really about and the strength and skills to start getting us back on track.


Such an immense amount of damage has been done, it will take years to set things right. We have become so morally and fiscally bankrupt, the idea of 'American Empire' would be laughable if it were not so pathetic.


Basic American principles need to be reaffirmed, such as the rule of law is for everyone and no one is above the law; that equality and justice for all are more than fancy rhetoric; that elections are sacred and should be absolutely protected against tampering; that we honor and revere the provisions of the Constitution; our precious natural resources must be protected; that the individual is of more value than a faceless corporate entity.


By all means, take on Hillary. She needs to be taught a lesson, the same one that Bush et al need to learn: That this is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. And we aren't giving it up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PLEASE run and dump Hillary
Posted by: jolo on Dec 5, 2005 3:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. First I have to address anyone who is a bigot or a "reverse" bigot. The fac t that Hillary Clinton is a woman, HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER about her character, ethics, record, etc. Look at what a person is about, not their sex, race, religion, etc.

2. Hillary is nothing but a prostitute to Corporate America. She cares only about her individual power and money. She has dumped the supporters that she manipulated, mostly women, who thought she was someone that she isn't.

3. Her lack of integrity, courage, values and ideals are doing a number on the Democrats.

4. She is Bush light. When I have heard her disgusting stance on exploiting the soldiers and keeping the occupation of Iraq going because "we can't leave until something positive happens of it", say it all.

5. Where is she about the destruction of student loans, Where is she about the 100,000 paxpayer paid mercenaries fighting for U.S. Corporate interests in Iraq. Where is she about the lies that the administration dumped on the American people and congress for the reason for going into Iraq.

6. Where is she to stand up and let people know that "insurgents" are Iraqi citizens who are fighting against the takeover of a their oil resources by another country. THEY ARE NOT TERRORISTS. There WAS NO terrorism until the U.S. illegally blew up their soverign nation, took away their media, gave contracts to fix the destroyed infustructure to Halliburon without any bids. They destroyed their schools, hospitals, infustructure, ways to get food and electricity.

7. Where is she to support the troops, meaning, getting them the heck out of there and home where they belong. Is she active in getting protective vests, boots, food, equipment, arms to the soldiers. Is she helping to stop the closing of military hospitals?

8. As a "women", where was she when a women general who exposed and refused to order torture in Iraq was FIRED by by the army.

9. Hillary has been very instrumental in wrecking the lives of so many middle class people with her clandestine meetings with Indian Businessmen, against the interests of American workers and their famalies.

Thanks,

Jon

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Israel Posted by: hbw
» RE: PLEASE run and dump Hillary Posted by: robchapman
» Dump Hillary Posted by: CatDad
» RE: How about John Edwards? Posted by: ShaSpirit
The late Paul Wellstone's slogan was "vote for what you believe in,"
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Dec 5, 2005 3:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To me this says that the issues are more important than the candidates and the parties. We have issues that are important to the lower economic class, some of which were enumerated by the author. They should be what decides our votes. Well and good if a candidate comes along who supports our views but better that we tell both parties what we want. We are the majority. Let them decide if they want our support or the support of the rich and powerful. Any issue, be it ending the war, health care, environmental concerns, etc. if it has enough popular support will be seriously considered for inclusion in the platforms of both parties. Both parties are drifting farther and farther to the right because they want the support of the corporate elite. The time has come to move both parties to the left, to the middle of the road.. Put both parties on notice that you will not "hold your nose" and vote for a candidate who does not support your view. Now is the time to do this while both parties need votes. After you vote your vote has lost its power. Act now! Click on Do it now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can relate - good luck & power to you!
Posted by: activist kaza on Dec 5, 2005 5:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jon:

I admire your chutzpah. I took on a similar DINO/Republicrat/"so-called centrist" incumbent D here in Oregon in 2004. The heat and hostility against me was tremendous. "The party" doesn't appreciate the value of primary challengers any longer.

My opponent was also a woman, and a four-termer who had been unchallenged by another D since her first election to Congress in 1996. Having said that, I cannot imagine the enormity of taking on a national icon (and the party's putative nominee in 2008!)...excuse the expression, but your balls are much bigger than mine!

But thank God for you, and other brave citizens willing to speak the truth. Hillary and the rest of the "corporate-crats" can't continue to have it both ways - or rather, to speak out of both sides of their mouths. I am glad you and like-minded New Yorkers will be sending her a message.

I will probably feature your campaign on my blog at some point in the near future, so keep an eye out!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

skidmorem
Posted by: skidmorem on Dec 5, 2005 5:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This kind of reasoning is precisely why we are stuck with the worst president since at least Andrew Johnson. "Rather than vote for the lesser of two evils, I won't vote!" I'll take my toys and go home and stamp my feet!

The last thing we need to defeat Bush is internal fights among the opposition. First things first! Remember the old adage that the best is the greatest enemy of the good. Nothing is more true in politics. Listen guys, if you want things to get better, you don't insist on purity as the price of your participation.

Don't play into Bush's hands! If he were to read the comment here (that is, if he could stand AlterNet or if he could read) he'd be chortling.

Remember, if Nader had stayed out of Florida in 2000, we would not have had the thugs in power since 2001.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: skidmorem Posted by: jbetterl
» RE: skidmorem Posted by: Gma1
» RE: skidmorem Posted by: Lincoln fan
» Dangerous assumption. . . . Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: skidmark Posted by: skidmorem
» RE: skidmark Posted by: AlanSmithee
» RE: skidmark Posted by: skidmorem
» RE: skidmark Posted by: VAGreen
» RE: skidmark Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: skidmark Posted by: skidmorem
» RE: skidmorem Posted by: tuff_bird
» RE: skidmorem Posted by: skidmorem
» RE: Amen to that Posted by: ShaSpirit
Hillary is at the Bottom of the List
Posted by: Spyder on Dec 5, 2005 5:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are a bunch of possible Democratic candidates who not only will be easier to elect, but they will be better for the country after the election. Hillary is simply Bush Lite, and we need a lot more than that to turn the country around to the right direction. Here is my list, in descending order: Gore - Edwards - Obama - Daschle - Kerry. Has anyone here realized that the Republicans are baiting the Dems into selecting Hillary because they know they can beat her? Write it down: a Gore-Edwards ticket will win. Anyone else is a risky choice.

http://e-tabitha.com/WakeUp.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Run against someone you can beat
Posted by: robchapman on Dec 5, 2005 5:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find the author to be too opportunistic for words.

Taking on a big-name dino-republicrat may do wonders for his ego and for the egos of all the simon pure people who think that their monopoly on virtue prohibits them from voting for the "lesser of two evils."

Whatever this writer may think of of popular statewide incumbents of either party, he will not be able to beat them, but he might be able to beat an alderman, a county legislator or perhaps even a town supervisor.

It is hard for me believe that the part of NYS where this writer lives is so virtuous that there are no corrupt, incompetent local officials that he could run against.

Oh but wait, municipal elections were this year and now he has missed them. HOW CONVENIENT, his conscience started acting up on him AFTER the elections he might have been able to win are over. To run with no responsibility for actually having to govern, that seems to be this writer's game.

Talk about accountability in government!!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2 WORDS
Posted by: zoza on Dec 5, 2005 6:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have 2 words that describe the next President of the United States.... Mark Warner

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: howmad1
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: crusty
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: Gma1
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: 2 WORDS Posted by: ShaSpirit
Paul Massaron
Posted by: Paul Massaron on Dec 5, 2005 7:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jon, reading your justification for running for the nomination for the US Senate from New York, I could not resist hoping that after this adventure is over that they rerun Man from LaMancha on Broadway and you audition for that. Who knows you might get that part, if you can sing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Paul Massaron Posted by: Lincoln fan
A lot of African American voters themselves in Hampton Roads
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 5, 2005 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
are steadily dropping Hillary as their choice and thinking more favorably of Mark Warner as a better alternative in 2008. Despite much of his centrism, he should have no problem changing course as the crisis in this country gets worse for the next 3 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mick3
Posted by: mick3 on Dec 5, 2005 7:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The basic problem with the moribund Democratic Party is that it has been hijacked by Al From and his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), a rightwing coup to be sure. The DLC is has driven the Democratic Party into irrelevance. The point? I wouldn't be surprised; Al From appears to be a neocon mole. It was the DLC that took down Howard Dean in the 2004 primaries, in favor of the corporatist, John Kerry. Neither Kerry nor Clinton can say anything of relevance to working people and women because their politics work directly against ordinary citizens. Like Carter and B Clinton, even when they speak Left, they act Right. So we actual Democrats get more meaningless pap, obfuscation, and failure.

I, too---after a lifetime as a Democrat and having beavered away at grassroots work for the Party when it meant something---have resolved never, ever to vote Against rather than For, for lack of a real choice. Unless we bombard such nominally Democratic bodies as the DSCC and DNC with the demand to rid the Party of the DLC, nothing will change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Here, here!! Posted by: sausage
» RE: mick3 Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Posted by: CatDad
Go for it!
Posted by: ScottP on Dec 5, 2005 8:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The war has provided an excellent vehicle to expose the true colors of people, and Hillary has shown herself to be a war witch, not surprising given her robber baron upbringing. She is not second best in New York, she's not even in the top half of a state of millions. Watch for her to throw some morsels to the anti-war crowd during the campaign, a proposed reduction in troops here and a speech against torture there, all the while spouting "support democracy" and "war on terror" propaganda as her bread and butter. But don't forget to watch the ball, for the war is really a means to allow the rich and powerful to collect up more of their beloved money and power.

Send her packing to some other state!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

VOTE NADER
Posted by: Greatdentini on Dec 5, 2005 9:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
VOTE THIRD PARTY. OTHERWISE YOU'RE WASTING YOUR VOTE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: VOTE NADER Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: VOTE NADER Posted by: VAGreen
Paul Wellstone
Posted by: chaoslegs on Dec 5, 2005 11:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I admired Paul Wellstone for many things. He did vote to authorize the Patriot Act and Defense of Marriage Act.

He did show courage by voting against Iraq War effort in 2002 while in a close election year. I was very sad when he died, and was reminded of it quite frequently when I dropped off the mail after work each day across the street from the memorials.

I always wonder if he would have entered the presidential race in 2004, I think he could have won.

We miss him, especially with Coleman the lap dog as his replacement, but he had some bad votes too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good luck!
Posted by: kablooie on Dec 5, 2005 12:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary left Arkansas a smoking ruin and she'll do the same to whatever else her greedy, manicured hands touch.

(If Arkansas didn't even want her back, what does that tell you?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No more Clintons
Posted by: lamar on Dec 5, 2005 12:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary is a giant disappointment. She should switch parties now. She turns regular democrats into GOPers. I know it is too much to hope that the Clintons are never elected to anythnig ever again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yay Jonathan Tasini!
Posted by: rclord on Dec 5, 2005 12:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Jonathan Tasini for taking on Hillary Clinton! If I lived in New York (I'm in California) I'd definitely vote for you. She needs to be taught a lesson. Like so many Democrats, Hillary Clinton doesn't oppose the Republicans; she enables them. She is an opportunist and a hypocrite. If more Democrats had more integrity like Dennis Kucinich, the Republicans would never be where they are today, and the country probably wouldn't be in as much of a mess it's in right now. There also probably wouldn't be a war in Iraq. It is the Democrats' own fault that Ralph Nader ran for President. If the Democrats stood up to the Republicans better, he would have less likely run.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yay Jonathan Tasini! Posted by: Basenjis
Go for it my good man!
Posted by: humanity101 on Dec 5, 2005 3:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Scott Ritter put it, "Hillary is a classical chicken hawk". Those people who would not hesitate to spill the last drop of other people's blood make me puke. Equally disgusting are the radical religious "wrong" people who seem to have never heard of the phrase "Thou Shall Not Kill" or "Torture" I might add. I guess as long as "it" is in the womb, you shall not kill, but as soon as it can walk, killing doesn't seem to bother them. Does anyone have a bumper sticker that says "You cannot simultaneously be anti-abortion and pro-war"? To me, hypocrits are worse than terrorists. At least terrorists don't pretend to be your friends and then stab you on the back. If Chelsea Clinton volunteers to fight in Falluja, then I'll vote for Hillary. Otherwise, please stop spilling other people's blood for lies and deceptions, and must I say, Halliburton (Carlyle, Lockheed Martin, Boeing and other war profitteers). It is immoral and pathetic, not patriotic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HISTORY HAS SHOWN NO SUCH THING.
Posted by: Greatdentini on Dec 5, 2005 5:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Saying that "history has shown that voting for a third party is wasting your vote" is incredible bullshit. History has shown no such thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary, forget about it!
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Dec 5, 2005 5:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have too much baggage from your husband's administration to defend. You follow the "safe" middle of the road rather than speaking out for the poor and middle class. You have the name but lack the balls. Hell, if we really want a Democrat who asumes the role of Republican Light, we still have Uncle Joe Lieberman to jump in an loose again.

If the next Democratic candidate for President doesn't come from the Franklin D. Roosevelt college of social responsibility, backbone and charisma -the Democratic Party is dead and gone for decades if not forever.

Wise up Hillary, get with the program and defend traditional Democratic values and their promise to middle America or stay in the Senate. The whole country is watching but will not wait forever - you have to win the nomination it is not a coronation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary is Hopeless
Posted by: MingTheMerciless on Dec 5, 2005 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the Democratic Party doesn't disown spineless poll-watching pols like Hillary Clinton, it will deservedly be doomed and the party will eventually simply die, deservedly. I am tired of the lesser-evilism criminal racket that is the Democratic Party of the past several years. It's like "Your money or your life". There's no real choice. I vowed as of last year never to make such a fake choice again. Ever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Um, to be an opposition party is not the goal
Posted by: gjames on Dec 5, 2005 6:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You're conceding too much. Democrats should not desire an effective opposition party. Democrats should occupy the vast center of American politics that the right has abandoned. That's what it takes to be elected governing party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your question, "Can I win this race?"
Posted by: gjames on Dec 5, 2005 6:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Answer: No. Obviously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

blue lady
Posted by: blue lady on Dec 5, 2005 10:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is my first comment....ever....on line that is. First, as a woman, I'm so pleased that Hillary being a woman didn't "color" anyone's opinion....ha!
As an older woman I would be pleased to see a woman achieve the top job. Nice to know that in woman's history we were able to obtain a soul, the vote, almost equal pay and almost owner of our own bodies.
I really like Hillary...of course she is political....she is trying to play the game...be glad because the GOP have it down to a science!
Were you also disappointed to know Ike, Roosevelt, Kennedy amongst countless others, had other women besides their wives? Seems that is also a temptation of men in power. I think Hillary handled Bill's scandal with class....whether she should have stayed or left was HER CHOICE....get it?
I, however, was against this war, and find it difficult to reconcile that difference. I will most likely not vote for Hillary, if she becomes the Dem's choice, because I cannot forgive that. My husband is retired military and..if you send people off to war you better be darn sure the cause is justifiable. I am heart sick to think of all the lives; theirs and ours, that have died because of lies that took us into war. I, too, wish we could have a candidate that shows real leadership skills, real integrity and doesn't let the polls influence him/her too much, but remember...if you want to win and get the GOP out of control.....some politiking will have to go on....it's unfortunately how the game is played

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

blue lady
Posted by: blue lady on Dec 5, 2005 10:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is my first comment....ever....on line that is. First, as a woman, I'm so pleased that Hillary being a woman didn't "color" anyone's opinion....ha!
As an older woman I would be pleased to see a woman achieve the top job. Nice to know that in woman's history we were able to obtain a soul, the vote, almost equal pay and almost owner of our own bodies.
I really like Hillary...of course she is political....she is trying to play the game...be glad because the GOP have it down to a science!
Were you also disappointed to know Ike, Roosevelt, Kennedy amongst countless others, had other women besides their wives? Seems that is also a temptation of men in power. I think Hillary handled Bill's scandal with class....whether she should have stayed or left was HER CHOICE....get it?
I, however, was against this war, and find it difficult to reconcile that difference. I will most likely not vote for Hillary, if she becomes the Dem's choice, because I cannot forgive that. My husband is retired military and..if you send people off to war you better be darn sure the cause is justifiable. I am heart sick to think of all the lives; theirs and ours, that have died because of lies that took us into war. I, too, wish we could have a candidate that shows real leadership skills, real integrity and doesn't let the polls influence him/her too much, but remember...if you want to win and get the GOP out of control.....some politiking will have to go on....it's unfortunately how the game is played

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tasini is (or was) Green
Posted by: hbw on Dec 6, 2005 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I salute Mr. Tasini's courage, even though he is running in the Democratic primary; we're still a few years away from having a viable Green Party candidacy at that level.

Hillary was by far the less of two evils when she ran in 2000, but Republicans continue to blame all the world's problems on her, and true New York Democrats are way ahead of her policy-wise.

The squabble about third parties being a waste of a vote is meaningless. The problem clearly is with the system, and we the people have the right and the power to change that system so that our biggest 1.5 parties, representing barely 50% of the population together, don't dominate the political landscape. The Greens advocate Instant Runoff Voting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]