::::::::
22 January 2008I have been following the Democratic campaign as much as I can. I have watched the debates and read the opinion pieces and it occurs to me that, whatever the Clintons are or aren’t, our situation at home and abroad is so exigent that we need two presidents to face it and fight it. And that is what the Clintons are blatantly offering.
Personally I prefer John Edwards to the others. He represents perhaps the truest American, the one who pulled himself out of poverty, first one in his family to achieve higher education.
I noticed during last night’s debate that, although Edwards twice mentioned his father’s presence in the audience, the camera never focused on him but at least twice singled out Chelsea Clinton.
Speaking of stereotyping, it was the men against the Clintons last night. Edwards and Obama nearly embracing last night while paying only token homage to Hillary after the debate. And she was the one, during the debate, who oozed such warmth toward the end: “Look at the three of us sitting here!” “Such diversity” was her implication. “So much of America.”
But what I read through this security was a woman leaning on a man, a powerful man, who just might lead her to victory. Of course we can’t have a female Edwards as the first woman president. That has to happen gradually. I don’t dispute that. Hillary has accomplished a lot on her own, though, transparently but sometimes effectively, bringing to the fore the importance of universal health care even if she failed at achieving it.
There was a certain jealousy among the guys and a certain fear of having to stand up to Bill Clinton, their most formidable rival. I don’t envy them. Obama came close to losing it as he spoke his first words last night. And Edwards’s brow is creased by a wife he adores who will probably exit from life prematurely.
Obama gave a stunning speech at Ebenezer Baptist Church, pulpit of both Martin Luther Kings. But he’s no MLK. Nor is he JFK.I won’t be sure who he is until, gulp, he faces Bill Clinton right in the eye, speech to speech. I wouldn’t go there. He’s scary. I was up close to him as in Bristol, PA, he insisted on touching every member of the large crowd who had come to hear him speak in support of the local Democratic congressional candidate. Unlike Edwards, he was scary.
At an event where Edwards spoke, as he approached the crowd to touch his listeners, his choir, he held my hand for thirty seconds, to my surprise. He cared about my despair over the 2004 elections. I knew he was preaching to the choir, and the room wasn’t that crowded.
As strenuous as it is to witness these people going at each other like trained wild animals who occasionally threaten each other despite fear of the trainer’s whip (Blitzer’s et al.), it is necessary. They aspire toward the most powerful position in the world. And all three of them greatly excel the incumbent, as does McCain. That thought I read in the Times today. No competition from the predecessor.
But a lot of corruption backstage, during the election and post-election if a Democrat wins. The right-wing Republicans were relentless, conniving, brutal, and brilliant during the Clinton years. And losing their power will give them plenty of time for more destructiveness that even scares Bill Clinton.
I have shared nothing but random thoughts. I am not for Hillary but Billary. Otherwise I favor Edwards. He is real and his agenda and programs reach me. I want healthcare for all the people. I want less vanity than Clinton or Obama manifest. I want action louder than words.
Edwards may pay $400 for his haircuts but Hillary spends far more on her designer clothes, probably rivaling Jackie Kennedy in that department. And in standing on MLK’s pulpit, Obama promises far more than he or any of the candidates will ever be able to give.
©
