I am a Democrat and I've never been prouder.
This week, I watched as Hillary Clinton was officially entered into the books as the woman who has come closest to the American presidency, the first serious woman candidate of a major political party. If you think we haven't come that far where sexism is concerned, you might remember the tone of the dialogue years ago, when Geraldine Ferraro was selected as the VP pick for Mondale. (Comments like "I don't want someone with PMS to be second in line to the nuclear button" -- and worse -- were commonplace.) But Senator Clinton was taken seriously as a candidate because she had the credentials. And I am proud of that and I am proud that my party was able to smash that glass ceiling. Or at least bash a very large crack in it.
I also watched last night as Barack Obama was officially named the Democratic nominee for president. I've made no secret of my admiration for Obama, but even if he's not your first choice, please celebrate with me that our country, or at least one major political party, has nominated a person of color for president. Less than two centuries ago, people of color were officially considered less than human (3/5 of a human, to be precise), pieces of property, disposable things rather than human beings with rights and dignity. (By the way, women were also considered chattel, without equal rights to men and they had to wait fifty more years to get the vote and an extra ten years for their civil rights movement. But I digress.) Last night, we saw a barrier break open and I will tell you that it brought tears to my eyes.
There's still a lot of nastyness out there -- racism, sexism, homophobia, and so on -- but today I'm basking in the glow of a dream at least partially realized:
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Remember what it’s like when you first fall in love with someone? Everything they do is cute or charming or endearing. You are struck, over and over again, by how alike you are: “When Harry Met Sally” is your favorite movie, too? You like margaritas but hate gin-and-tonics? You’re liberal on social issues but want a balanced budget and a strong defense, just like me?
Oh, those days of infatuation are fun. You keep finding things that you have in common, shared interests, ways in which you see eye-to-eye on the big issues. You want to learn more and more about the other person, and as you do, you’re even more amazed at how much you like them. It’s exciting, exhilarating, affirming. Even things that might otherwise irk you (say, snoring) are turned on their head, into something charming (his snoring is so cute! It’s like a reminder that he’s next to me in bed!)
But then one day, reality strikes. You discover something about that person that is different from you. Maybe it’s something little: he is passionate about golf and you think it’s a waste of a perfectly good park. Or something big: she goes to church every Sunday morning without fail, and you’re an atheist who likes to sleep ‘til noon on Sunday. That endearing little habit of snoring suddenly starts keeping you awake at night.
I used to share a beach house with a bunch of single professionals, and a great many of them only stuck around in a relationship while it was in the exciting, exhilarating, infatuation phase. “What ever happened to Kathy?” we’d ask. “I found out she had a nose job when she was younger, and now she just seems so fake to me.“ Or “How are things with Ryan going?” “We broke up. He was really into camping, and who wants to sleep in a tent when you can stay in a perfectly nice hotel?”
But real life isn’t like that. Anybody who’s been in a relationship measured in years instead of weeks can tell you that with every couple, there comes a time when you stop seeing all the similarities and start seeing all the differences. And consciously or unconsciously, at some point after that, you make a decision whether to keep going or call it quits. She likes going to church every morning but you’re an atheist; you can either call the whole thing off, or try to figure out if that different approach to religion is really a dealbreaker. Maybe you have a long conversation, or several long conversations, about religion or the lack thereof. Maybe you discover that she has her doubts, too, but she finds it comforting to keep going to church each week, as a form of stress release. Maybe you discover that she is firmly committed to her religious views, but doesn’t care if you aren’t; the next thing you know, she goes to church, you sleep in, and you start a lovely tradition of having breakfast at a local diner when you’re up and she’s done. But if you bail before exploring it any further, you’ll never know, will you?
Lately I’ve heard a lot of muttering from progressives about their waning enthusiasm for Barack Obama. “But he voted for FISA immunity, and I think he shouldn’t have.” “I hate his latest commercial with the celebrity theme!” “He shouldn’t put offshore oil drilling on the table, even as part of a larger energy package.”
I agree with some of these points of dispute (e.g. FISA immunity) and disagree with others (I like the McCain-as-celebrity commercial). But you know what? I’m not breaking up with Obama just yet. I’m willing to learn more about him, to hear what he has to say about why he’s done things I disagree with. I’m willing to stay in this relationship and see how it works out. I’ve been married for almost thirteen years and I know that it’s entirely possible to disagree with someone on some things, maybe even some important things, but also to realize that agreeing to disagree on some issues is worth the many tremendous things about the relationship. I can put up with the obsessive-compulsive cleaning thing (You want to clean the bathroom instead of going out to dinner?!) because my husband is so patient and sweet with the kids. He can put up with my irrational anxiety (No, honey, I don’t think the babysitter looks like a serial killer) because I can always make him laugh.
I don’t think it’s possible to find a life partner – or a political candidate – with whom I agree on every issue, big and small, 100 percent of the time. I think it’s possible to forge a relationship that’s good – pretty damn great, in fact – even if there’s times when the other person disappoints me, or hurts my feelings, or surprises me by changing his mind or expressing a different opinion than I thought he would.
That approach has worked well for the last twelve-plus years of my marriage. I’m willing to see how it works when it comes to a political candidate. And not just any political candidate, but a political candidate who I still think has the potential to be The One.
I've created a blog -- a website that takes the form of an on-line journal -- to allow us to centralize information about the Main Line campaign. Please drop me an email at mainlineoATyahooDOTcom if you have an event you want to publicize, need volunteers or supplies, and so on. Thank you!
The link is here.
What if everyone sat down for 5 minutes, and wrote out a note or card of about 5 sentences telling Sen. Obama how much he means to us, how he inspires us, how he has changed our lives and how we are counting on him to win this election, and mailed it to his campaign headquarters? It’d be nice if we could also include a check for five bucks or a five-dollar bill in it. If you aren’t comfortable writing, you could have your kids draw a picture or even copy a quotation that you find inspiring. Just reach out to the Senator and share some of your hope and inspiration with him.
I was really moved as a child by the scene in “Miracle on 34th Street” when the guys from the post office bring in all the mail for Kris Kringle and shower it on the judge’s bench. There is something very tangible about writing a note or card that you lose with the email process. That’s why I think it’d be nice to do it via postal mail. Imagine if Obama’s staffers brought him a steady stream of inspiring, handwritten notes from the heart for him to see – wouldn’t that help pump him up?
This will work best if it goes viral - so please pass on this link:
http://fiveforbarack.blogspot.com/
which contains the mailing address, details and a link to print out a donor form if you care to include a monetary contribution. But this isn't about the money -- it's about the hope. Let's give some back.
We’ve heard a lot in recent months about the rise of the “grass roots” political campaign. But what if the grass roots are crafted from yarn and knitting needles, and help premature babies in a NICU get a better chance at life?
The last thing I expected when I joined an on-line knitting website was to tap into a group of diehard political supporters. But there it was, among scores of other groups on the website, “Knitters for Obama.” The group had only two requirements: you had to be a knitter and you had to support Barack Obama. At last count, the group had over 1100 members.
If you envision knitters as sedate grannies, knitting baby blankets for their grandkids in their rocking chairs, you’re wrong. Knitters are a microcosm of the world, and Knitters for Obama reflects that: young and old, male and female, from every state in the US (and abroad), gay and straight, lawyers and stay-at-home moms and therapists and every other occupation.
By the time I joined, the Knitters for Obama group had already organized a fundraiser, auctioning off an aghan and raising over $8700 for the campaign.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/14709897@N00/2416608496/" title="afghan by Black Bunny Hop, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2138/2416608496_246204634c_m.jpg" width="240" height="180" alt="afghan" /></a>
That’s impressive – but what really made an impression with me was the group’s decision to heed Obama’s call to service. They created a drive for handmade caps in tiny sizes – some only a few inches in circumference --- to donate in Obama’s honor to Pennsylvania hospitals that treat premature babies. (Hats will be donated in other states as enough are finished.) Because preemie babies have trouble maintaining their body temperature, they must be dressed especially carefully, with an eye to warmth. But because these infants are so tiny, they often do not fit into regular-sized baby clothing. Knitters and crocheters can create perfectly-sized hats, ranging in circumference from six to twelve inches, to fit these little heads.
During the past week, my mail carrier has delivered to me over fifteen envelopes full of pre-mie caps – more than fifty of them.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/14709897@N00/2413985240/" title="mail by Black Bunny Hop, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2052/2413985240_00e7138a99_m.jpg" width="240" height="180" alt="mail" /></a>
Fifty-plus more are on the way. Each was lovingly handcrafted to help a tiny baby who was born too soon. Each was made by someone who was so inspired by Barack Obama’s call for real change that they spent hours of their time to help infants in another state. I will be delivering them to local NICU units in the hope that they will help keep someone’s precious infant warm during a stressful stay in the hospital.
A hundred Pennsylvania preemies with handmade caps to keep them warm.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/14709897@N00/2405366111/" title="Donated premie caps by Black Bunny Hop, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/2405366111_2e7fecc275_m.jpg" width="240" height="159" alt="Donated premie caps" /></a>
That’s change we can truly believe in.
"Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don't oppose all wars.
"My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.
"I don't oppose all wars. After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don't oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.
"What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
"Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda.
"I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.
"So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the President today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
"You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
"You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
"You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil. Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.
"The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not -- we will not -- travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain."
Hillary Clinton's exaggerated claims to foreign policy experience look even more ridiculous now that Sinbad -- comedian and star of the now-defunct sit-com "A Different World" -- has shared his recollections of the time he accompanied Clinton (and Sheryl Crow) on her ballyhooed trip to Kosovo.
In an interview with the Washington Post, Sinbad said the "scariest" part of the trip was wondering where he'd eat next. "I think the only 'red-phone' moment was: 'Do we eat here or at the next place.'" As for danger? "I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in a sense of peril, or 'Oh, God, I hope I'm going to be OK when I get out of this helicopter or when I get out of his tank.'"
Sinbad went on to counter Clinton's claim that "We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady" by pointing out "What kind of president would say, 'Hey, man, I can't go 'cause I might get shot so I'm going to send my wife...oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you.'"
Now if you think this is as ridiculous as it gets, hang on. The response from the Clinton campaign gives us a glimpse at how completely shameless and power-mad HRC is: "It appears that Sinbad's experience in Bosnia goes back further than Senator Obama's does. In fact, has Senator Obama ever been to Bosnia?"
Clinton/Sinbad '08: now there's a ticket with experience.
10. The right-wing's certain attempts to bring up old scandals, proven and unproved, from Bill Clinton's perjury conviction. to Whitewater to Travelgate to the health care fiasco she presided over.
9. Billary.
8. Her insistence that some states "matter" more than others and that some votes mean more than others.
7. Refusal to disclose donor list for the Clinton Presidential Library and for urging certain papers to be withheld from public scrutiny in the National Archives -- including materials related to allegations that Sen. Clinton's brother improperly influenced the granting of pardons by Bill Clinton.
6. Her Nixonian comment about false statements that Obama is a Muslim, saying "not that I know of" and pandering to anti-Muslim prejudice.
5. Playing the fear card right out of the Karl Rove playbook via her 3 a.m. ad, even though her own husband campaigned by saying "If one candidate is trying to scare you and one is trying to make you think, you should go with the one who makes you think."
4. Misrepresenting her foreign policy experience when numerous sources who were actually there have stated that she did not participate in any meaningful way in foreign policy -- e.g. Kosovo (a one-day trip with Sinbad and Cheryl Crow, a day after the borders were opened for Kosovan refugees), Northern Ireland (meet and greets) and China (she gave a speech).
3. Choosing to endorse the experience of the Republican presidential nominee rather than a fellow Democrat, knowing that this will provide ammunition for the opponents of the Democratic Party.
2. She refuses to release her tax returns. That means we don't know where her money comes from; the source of money she "borrowed" for her struggling campaign; or the possible effect her financial dealing may have should she be elected President.
1. On the one occasion when Clinton indisputably had a chance to affect foreign policy -- the Iraq vote -- she blew it and voted with Bush to authorize military action in Iraq.
As she turns her focus to the Pennsylvania primary, Sen. Hillary Clinton touts her “lifetime of experience” and her “tested” and “vetted” credentials. She evokes fond memories of her husband’s presidency, enticing us to believe that we can roll back time and make the last seven-plus years of madness go away simply by electing another Clinton to the White House.
The problem is that the halcyon days she conjures never happened.
Have we so quickly forgotten what it was like to have the Clintons in the White House? Allow me to remind you:
· A botched attempt – spearheaded by Hillary herself – that set back the cause of universal, affordable health care in this country by a decade or more; Clinton admitted in her biography that her own political inexperience was a major factor in this fiasco;
· She became the only First Lady in history to be subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury in the lengthy Whitewater investigation, after failing to disclose billing records that mysteriously appeared two years after they were first requested;
· The TravelGate scandal, in which the final Independent Counsel report found that there was substantial evidence that she was involved in the firings and that she had made "factually false" statements.
· Filegate, in which it was alleged that Clinton had improperly accessed FBI background reports on former Republican White House employees;
· An investigation into allegations of Sen. Clinton having improperly trading in cattle futures;
· Repeated allegations of sexual indiscretion and impropriety on the part of Bill Clinton, including his impeachment and the revocation of his law license for perjury and allegations of intimidating witnesses;
· Sen. Clinton’s dismissive and insensitive remarks about women who have followed more traditional paths in our society (the Tammy Wynette controversy);
· Promises of “two for the price of one” and “Billary”;
· Allegations that her brother, Hugh Rodham, accepted money in exchange for facilitating presidential pardons;
· The mishandled and deadly Waco showdown;
· “Don’t ask/don’t tell,” asking gay Americans in the military to be willing to die for their country without their country respecting their sexual orientation;
· Botched nominations by improperly-vetted candidates like Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood;
· Auctioning off nights in the Lincoln Bedroom in exchange for large campaign contributions;
· Having to return items found to be White House property after helping themselves to such valuables upon moving out.
Sen. Clinton’s supporters will no doubt cite the “vast right-conspiracy” against her for all of these shortcomings, scandals and failures – but why on earth would Pennsylvanians choose to send the Clinton circus back to the White House for four more years to be a lightning rod for further controversy and scandal – particularly when her conduct – and that of her husband – during this campaign assures us that she’ll bring more of the same?
The choice on April 22 is clear for any thinking Democrat: vote for Barack Obama. For “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Where are Senator Clinton’s tax returns?
Unlike Senator Obama, who has released his income tax returns for the past seven years, Hillary Clinton has not released hers. Why not? What might be in those tax returns to raise a few eyebrows? It is indeed ironic that the woman who claims she has been thoroughly “vetted” is afraid to reveal her tax returns – even though she has dipped into her personal funds to loan her struggling campaign money. Is it because she doesn’t want the voters of Pennsylvania to see questionable transactions (Whitewater, cattle futures) like those that have triggered public scrutiny in the past? Does she wish to hide an embarrassing scenario, perhaps that her husband’s income, in some cases derived from non-US interests, is in effect funding her campaign? Is it because the self-proclaimed champion of the working man and single mom is in reality a billionaire – or merely a millionaire?
Whatever the reason, there is no excuse for concealment and obfuscation. We’ve had seven and a half years of that and it’s time for a change.
Among other things, I am a fiber artist. I have a microbusiness producing handpainted yarns for knitters and crocheters. In conjunction with my friends from an on-line knitting forum called "Ravelry," I've created a special color called Audacity. It's a little corny, but the colorway was inspired by all of the different skin colors in our country, and is meant to symbolize that we can all co-exist beautifully. I am astonished at the number of knitters who wish to purchase a skein, knowing that the profits will be donated to the Obama campaign. In just a few days, I've generated $100 in income for the campaign, with more orders coming in every day. My website is http://www.blackbunnyfibers.com and if you don't see any photographs on the home page, that means I've sold all the finished skeins and will be adding more soon.
As I watched Barack Obama's speech in Virginia last night, I was struck by his courage. When you look back at his recent speeches, you see that Obama does not shrink from saying things that we need to hear -- even if we don't necessary want to hear them. I am not a Jew, but I applaud him for mentioning anti-Semitism. I am not gay, but I applaud him for mentioning homophobia. I applaud him for ripping off the myth of the Republican tax cuts: they benefit the wealthiest stratum of our country, the ones who don't need them. I applaud him for reminding us that candidates don't need to take money from lobbyests to succeed in national elections (a message Mrs. Clinton obviously hasn't received). I applaud him for reminding us that teaching our children poetry and art and music are worthwhile, even if they don't appear on national tests. I applaud him for calling us on our addiction to foreign oil -- and for saying so in front of an audience in Detroit. And I applaud him for refusing to buy into the myth that the war in Iraq was or is necessary; Obama reminds us that our invasion of Iraq was a terrible mistake and our continued presence there only compounds the error. And I applaud him for saying straight up that our cowboy, go-it-alone foreign policy makes us less safe.
Keep talking, Obama. I think America's starting to listen.
My state doesn't vote until April, so I'll have to just hope.
"Hope is the bedrock of this nation; the belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.
That is what we started here in Iowa, and that is the message we can now carry to New Hampshire and beyond; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down; the one that can change this country brick by brick, block by block, calloused hand by calloused hand - that together, ordinary people can do extraordinary things; because we are not a collection of Red States and Blue States, we are the United States of America; and at this moment, in this election, we are ready to believe again." -- Barack Obama
This is copied from my regular blog, but....
I am no Ted Kennedy or New York Times but for what it's worth, I've decided to talk about the U.S. presidential race. You know that I'm interested in politics; you also know that I am (ahem) highly opinionated. I like to think that my opinions tend to have a basis in logic and fact; I also know that my opinions also take into account my, for lack of a better phrase, gut instinct.
I had been supporting John Edwards all last year. Yesterday, however, Edwards withdrew from the race. Since the first democratic primary of this election season, when Edwards’ numbers were on the low side, I've been watching Obama and Clinton carefully, figuring that I might have to transfer my allegiance to one of them should Edwards drop out of the race. After the events of the past week or so, the time is here.I endorse Barack Obama for President.I look around at this country. I hear talk of blue states and red states, of voting blocs -- the black vote, the hispanic vote, the christian right, the senior citizens' vote -- and I see a country being destroyed by its divisions. I look at Washington and I see fear-mongerers trying to scare us into relinquishing our constitution and our values so that they might obtain more money and more power over us. I look at the staggering economy and I see a nation drowning in debt to pay for a war that we didn't need to fight, our president dangling puny income tax refunds in front of us while borrowing money from China to pay for tax breaks for corporations and the richest of the rich. I see one of the wealthiest countries in the world, where millions of people don’t have health insurance. I see a Democratic-led Congress, but by the slimmest of majorities, too afraid they'll lose power to take a stand on many of the important issues that need to be addressed.And I look at the two front-runners in the Democratic primaries. I see two intelligent candidates, both relatively new legislators, with positions on most issues that aren't tremendously different. Either is capable and smart enough to do the job; neither has a tremendous amount of experience to draw on. Both candidates have the advantage of being a potential "first": first woman or African-American President; both have the corresponding drawback of possibly tapping into irrational prejudice. How to decide between the two?I can point to some specific differences: I like that Obama has opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning, and I don't like that Clinton has yet to categorically state that her vote in favor of invading Iraq was a mistake. I like that Obama has refused to take money from lobbyists and I don't like that Clinton still does. I like that Obama or his surrogates have never played the gender card, and I don't like that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton have, directly and indirectly, used race to try to gain political advantage in these primaries. I don't like political dynasties -- the Bush double-whammy is proof positive of why not -- and I don't like the intimation that Hillary Clinton somehow deserves payback because her husband and his political enemies put her through the wringer or because it’s “her turn.”But really, the most important reason that I've come to support Barack Obama is not any of the above. My head tells me there isn't that much of a difference between the positions of the candidates; but my heart tells me there is a big difference. I listen to Obama describe the problems that our country faces:
We are up against the belief that it's ok for lobbyists to dominate our government - that they are just part of the system in Washington. But we know that the undue influence of lobbyists is part of the problem, and this election is our chance to say that we're not going to let them stand in our way anymore.We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose - a higher purpose.We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it's the kind of partisanship where you're not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea - even if it's one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it's bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.We are up against the idea that it's acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election. We know that this is exactly what's wrong with our politics; this is why people don't believe what their leaders say anymore; this is why they tune out. And this election is our chance to give the American people a reason to believe again.
I want a candidate who isn’t so desperate to win that he’ll say anything or do anything to get there. Obama has refused to let the Clintons and their race-baiting change his message or his tactics, even when the Clintons have tried to marginalize him as “the black candidate.”
I want a candidate who can get people – people of all ages, backgrounds, walks of life – excited about leadership and inspire them to make positive societal change. I see that in Obama’s supporters.
I want a candidate who has the real-world ability to work with politicians from all parties to try to get something done, without important legislation getting stalled by sound bites or pork or extremists. I don’t think Hillary Clinton will be able to do that effectively.
I want a candidate whose nomination won’t serve as a rallying call for the crazy conservatives (and Hillary’s certainly will, calling into question her ability to actually get elected) and I want a First Spouse (brace yourself; this one’s harsh) who isn’t a convicted perjurer who can't keep his pants zipped.
I want a candidate who believes this:
make no mistake: the choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders. It's not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white. It's about the past versus the future. It's about whether we're going to seize this moment to write the next great American story. So someday we can tell our children that this was the time when we healed our nation. This was the time when we repaired our world. And this was the time when we renewed the America that has led generations of weary travelers from all over the world to find opportunity, and liberty, and hope on our doorstep.
make no mistake: the choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders. It's not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white. It's about the past versus the future.
It's about whether we're going to seize this moment to write the next great American story. So someday we can tell our children that this was the time when we healed our nation. This was the time when we repaired our world. And this was the time when we renewed the America that has led generations of weary travelers from all over the world to find opportunity, and liberty, and hope on our doorstep.
