''Something's happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call.''
Barack rightfully responded by saying that these sort of ads play upon people’s fears and try to scare people into voting a certain way. But then he went ahead and created his own ad that functioned in the same way as Hillary’s.
''Something's happening in the world. When that call gets answered, shouldn't the president be the one, the only one, who had judgment and courage to oppose the Iraq war from the start?'' the ad asks.
Feeling the need to show there has been a “real phone moment,” he displayed “b*tch ass-ness.” And Hillary, with her ad showed “b*tch ass-ness.”
Examine Hillary’s and Barack’s most fervent supporters/endorsers.
Former Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro, a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton, has let her mouth go off saying:
I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against...For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position...And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Former Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a backer of Barack Obama, has chimed in on the quibble between Hillary and Barack saying:
"Hillary Clinton was a great first lady. I worked with her. I know what a good first lady she was. But it would be hard for me to draw some degree of connection between being a first lady and having experience to be the commander in chief.”
b*tch ass-ness. That’s all this is. It is cocky and involves putting people on a pedestal. As a result, the decision of who should be president is not being based on substantive reasoning which involves Barack's or Hillary's stances on the issues.
Now, forgive me if I am wrong, but weren’t we promised a campaign that would not be this filled with “b*tch ass-ness”?
When Barack Obama announced his run, he said, “"Today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way," the senator declared. "Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions."
I remember his speech from the 2004 Democratic convention where he spoke of America not being red states and blue states. I remember talk in the campaign about how people are fed up with Washington and want cooperation so compromises and changes can be made for the people of America.
With the way Barack Obama is running his campaign now and letting his endorsers go after Hillary by not condemning their remarks, his run is dividing the Democratic Party and making it difficult for the Party to talk about issues and getting things done.
And don't tell me he can't ask his endorsers to cool it. John McCain's campaign just responded to Peter King's remarks on Obama saying he will not support that kind of rhetoric towards his Democratic opponents in his campaign.
Unfortunately, Hillary, in her announcement to run for president, did not say anything about running a campaign free of “b*tch ass-ness” though. So, I cannot hold her to a high standard. Barack on the other hand should be ignoring her remarks, which are designed to make him play her and her husband’s game.
I do not care who wins the presidency. Neither candidate proposes the change America needs. Neither wish to end the “war on terror” or impeach Bush/Cheney. Neither is talking about stopping torture. And neither is talking about repealing the PATRIOT Act and other expansions. The list could continue for at least two more pages.
So, why do I care?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
