|
|
Tags for This Article:
Media (2946) Democratic (1657) Change (905) Future (673) Hillary Clinton (504) Thinking (397) Voter Participation (283) Hillary Clinton (278) Awareness (232) Students-Youth (114) Facebook (17)
|
(more...)
(less...)
Add to My Group
KEVIN So if somebody asks me this what do I say... She's pretty trusting of lobbyists. And I would agree that there are some "good" lobbyist groups if I didn't think those groups do not have any power in Washington anymore. I have more conversations. But this seems like a good place to end because I have shown you enough Hillary talk for one article (if you made it this far). Think about how these conversations worked though and how wrong they are. Very few were willing to just say to me why they were voting for Hillary. Instead, I got why America should vote for Hillary. That’s very nationalistic and that’s how fascism rises. I am not going to vote for somebody because America needs it. That may be part of my reasoning but ultimately, I have to look at what he or she is going to do for all the people individually around me and see how the impact will be good for the people and not just the nation itself. Too many wanted to know my preference on the candidates or my leaning (left/right). They know how to talk and what “talking points” to use to get Republicans vs. Democrats to vote. But as I argued, after seven years of Bush, somebody is right for the job and the rest aren’t worthy. Yet, this is a product of the “lesser of two evils” voting culture in America. The people can tell you why other candidates are worse than the one they support but cannot tell you why one is solely right for the job. Had I pursued people who talked about Obama and Edwards being worse than Hillary, I could have argued that she was no different and where would we have ended up? We would have ended up in one of the most uncomfortable situations we always end up: We’d be thinking Hillary, Barack, and John---that’s all we got---and we’re going to have to make do. Now, I think it’s extremely enlightening to hear from some that Hillary is not too “aggressive” and wants more “incremental” change. That means she has less of a vision for the future and more of a Washington, D.C. philosophy. She knows the inner workings of government and wishes to work within the system to make change even if it is broken or corrupt. And what change can be produced within the system? I think very little. Nobody convinced me to vote for her. Nobody really sounded like they were voting for her from the heart and mind except for the one that spoke about supporting the Clintons and being loyal. Other than that, they seemed really weak. Especially the guy who argued about Hillary championing women’s rights.
Kevin Gosztola goes to Columbia College in Chicago where he is studying film. He hopes to become a documentary filmmaker. He is currently working as a production assistant on a documentary called "Seriously Green" which traces the development of the Green Party throughout the 2008 election. He has a passion for journalism and writes articles or press releases in his spare time. Kevin Gosztola is also a student activist who believes in questioning the way America's systems work(its electoral system, its military-industrial complex, its foreign policy of American exceptionalism, its media which has become the Fourth Branch of government,etc.)
Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008 |
|
