“I think you’ll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to
say.“He’s never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of
experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put
forth a speech he made in 2002.” – Hillary
Clinton before the Texas and Ohio primaries.

And with that comment, Hillary Clinton proclaimed to the nation that if she can’t have the presidential nomination then the whole Democratic party might as well just vote Republican, because if the choice ends up being between McCain and Obama, well then Hillary thinks that four more years of Bush-like policies are A-OK for America.

Sounds like Hillary has Joe Lieberman for an advisor. If the Democrats don’t give you what is obviously rightfully yours to take, then the hell with them! Better to side with the law-breaking, torture loving, warmongering, Bush GOP than actually listen to the people of this country when they tell you that they prefer someone else for the top job.

Of course, when Hillary makes statements like the one above, it only highlights why so many Democrats-and so many Americans of all political flavors-have thrown their support behind Barack Obama. We don’t want a president who thinks that decades of experience in a crooked political system is a plus. We don’t want another president who refuses to acknowledge the reality of a situation, who thinks that she should just get her way because, by golly, it’s her turn and she’s due. We don’t want another imperialistic attitude sitting in the Oval Office, pretending that things will only be better with her in charge, that no one else (save the opposition party nominee) can quite handle the task. We don’t want another presidential election that boils down to a choice between bad and worse. And this time, we actually have a chance to change those dynamics by giving the nomination to Obama.

But for Hillary the equation is a different one altogether. For Hillary, the question isn’t who can better help to end corruption in government or who can give America back her reputation in the world or even who will inspire Americans to get back to building a better country and world. Nope, for Hillary the only question is “How can I win this thing?” And in answering that question, she shows that for her, winning is the only thing that matters.

Debate after debate has proven to voters that on many domestic issues, both Clinton and Obama share similar goals, varying mostly in the details of policy than in the necessity of movement. But under the surface is where the differences lie, and voters have figured out that where Obama seeks to empower us all, Hillary simply seeks power for its own sake-and for her own sense of personal destiny.

Since falling behind Obama in the delegate count, Hillary has pulled out all the stops to paint Obama as unprepared for the task of being president, hoping that by highlighting his so-called “inexperience” that voters will flock under her banner. It simply hasn’t worked. Even her primary victories in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island were slim victories and weren’t enough to even narrow the gap in the delegate count. But what Hillary seems to ignore at this stage of the game is the fact that many, many Republicans are less than satisfied with McCain as their nominee. These GOPers are now watching the Democratic race and asking themselves a serious question-could they vote for a Democrat? For many, if the candidate is Hillary the answer in a resounding “NO.” But if it is Obama, there are many who will jump ship and vote for a Democrat. At least they would if the vote was held today. But if Hillary-who they will never vote for in the general election-continues to portray Obama as a weak choice for Democrats, she is also hurting him for the general election and giving McCain a better shot of winning the prize. For someone who claims to despise the Bush Administration, stumping (even discreetly) for the GOP nominee who puts forth ambitions not so unlike those of Bush seems an odd way of telling voters that they should pick you. Especially Democratic voters who would rather sit in a pit of vipers than give the White House to another Bush-like contender.

Michael Gerson said it well in this Washington Post article:

“Though it is increasingly unlikely, Clinton may still have a path to the
nomination — and what a path it is. She merely has to puncture the balloon of
Democratic idealism; sully the character of a good man; feed racial tensions
within her party; then eke out a win with the support of unelected
superdelegates, thwarting the hopes of millions of new voters who would see an
inspiring young man defeated by backroom arm-twisting and arcane party rules.”

Indeed. And what a presidential path to victory that is.

But as she keeps on campaigning against Obama, she keeps highlighting her own presidential unworthiness by trying to paint Obama as some untested, incapable hack who showed up at the last minute and fooled us all into taking away what was and should be hers and hers alone.
Like when she tried to throw light on a land purchase Obama made. Obama acknowledged that the deal was a bad idea and has taken responsibility for his actions. He’s not denying the mistake, not battling to have records hidden. And yet for Hillary Clinton, years were spent examining a little land deal called Whitewater, years which she fought and fought to keep the whole thing under wraps.

And this whole “experience” thing is a real laugh too, especially if you look back to the 1992 campaign of her husband. Bill Clinton was so overmatched by the senior George Bush when it came to government service and experience that the Clinton’s had to portray his candidacy around a different theme- something they called “change.” Funny how what seemed such a good idea in 1992 (and was a good idea by the way) is now some kind of harbinger of failure if Obama wins the nomination. And let’s be real here- Hillary isn’t all that much more “experienced” at being president that anyone else who has never been president.

And then there is Hillary’s tendency towards secrecy. In a move that likely inspired Dick Cheney’s own energy meetings, Hillary has yet to fully release the documents related to her own health care meetings in the early 1990’s. She has yet to release her income tax returns even though Obama has done so and even though when running for Senate in 2000 she screamed about how her opponent didn’t release his returns. A small bit of hypocrisy that reveals a lot about the candidate herself.

And now her latest flop is with regards to the Florida and Michigan primaries-she “won” both events, despite a pledge not to campaign and now wants those delegates added to her tally. Of course, she and all the other candidates knew well in advance that those states’ delegates were not going to count because of some disagreement with the DNC and the stat Democratic parties. Obama (and the others still in the race at the time) followed the rules and stayed out of the states, in Michigan no name but Hillary even appeared on the ballot. But now that she is losing what is rightfully hers, she wants to change the game and get those delegates in. Tell me again how Hillary would be a different, better president that Bush? After all, lying and cheating and ignoring the rules doesn’t seem to have made this country a better place in the last eight years.

And for goodness sakes, I’m not
even mentioning her many corporate ties that make her incapable of legislating purely for her constituents, or her support for the war in Iraq, or her willingness to ignore the massive abuses of law perpetrated by Team Bush.

All grace and honorable when she was the presumed “inevitable” nominee, Hillary Clinton coming in second isn’t such a noble character. I suspect though that this is a more true representation of who Hillary Clinton really is, and of who she would be as president of this country.

And these are just some more reasons why I support Barack Obama.

(cross posted at Bring It On!)