Bush Three Is Wrong -- Is Clinton Three Any Better?
I had once considered John McCain an ultimately acceptable choice for president.
I thought that, compared to the other Republicans in the field earlier, McCain was a man who had lived a serious life. He had faced serious problems and offered respected solutions to issues such as campaign finance reform. McCain was a war hero, a US Senator and maverick in a party that often didn't know what to make of people like John McCain.
But mavericks don't make it to the highest echelons of the GOP. That is how we got stuck with this Bush. In order to ascend to the highest ranks of the Republican Party, you have got to realize that the current size and scope of the budget of the federal government is the greatest opportunity for the personal enrichment of the upper class in this country since the turn of the previous century or the period around World War II. As much as any industry that brings its products to market, selling your goods and services to the US government, and particularly the military, is a chance to make staggering and heretofore unseen profits. The current budget of the US Defense Department is the most shameful misappropriation of American tax dollars in our nation's history.
There are cycles in American history wherein the richest and most powerful people who actually own and run this country make there greatest effort to elect a true corporatocracy candidate. They literally steal the election, if need be. They install their witless, pliant factotums and they start skimming. They order even more expensive things we don't need. They relax regulations to the point where there are essentially no regulations at all. They might even start a war, if the can get away with it. If questionable people happen to be in the country taking flying lessons without learning how to land and you don't bother to investigate them, you increase the chances you may get away with it.
There are periods in American history when the haves just knock the have-nots to the ground and say,"Enough." They push the government into greater debt. They sign unconscionable mortgages for future generations. They lie and tell the American people that to get out of the convoluted military quagmire would only threaten us more. Threaten our children. Their future.
When their friends run into trouble, they bail them out. No, I mean we bail them out. They decide. We simply do the paying. Bill Clinton killed welfare as we knew it. Maybe its time had come. I was hoping that both Clintons would have condemned the Bear Stearns deal in the harshest terms. No such luck.
John McCain has changed. He drank the Kool-Aid, the one they served as baby formula in the Bush home all those years ago. McCain will be Bush Three. I was wrong about him. He has velcroed his lips to the ass of the elephant and he's gonna keep kissing until a second term would end.
But, if Bush Three is wrong, terrifyingly wrong, then is Clinton Three any better? Who do you think really has the guts to stand against the most potent special interests who truly care more about the dollar than the flag? We don't have a draft in this country in order keep politics out of military policy. For too many Americans, the truth is that, "My child isn't over there. That's all I care about." The fact that there has not been one great, national day of protest against this war will surely come back to haunt us all.
Who will end this war?
Obama will end this war.
I encourage the Democrats of the state of Pennsylvania to cast their vote tomorrow for Barack Obama.
I sweated this a lot. I admire both Bill and Hillary. But the shame and disgrace of how we have treated our own fighting men, not to mention many innocent people in Iraq, weighs more heavily on me now.
This country is in deep trouble. We not only need something effective, we need something new. I believe Obama will bring that more that Mrs. Clinton.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Clinton Three is absolutely a good thing. We can resume adding to the 22 million jobs created during Clinton One and Two. We can resume reducing the national debt that was reduced during Clinton One and Two. We can resume balancing the budgets that were balanced in Clinton Two.
However ... Obama One will be better!
Did Bill Clinton create all those jobs? No. So what makes you think Hillary can create jobs? Keep in mind, this is a woman who gets lots and lots of donations from companies who want to make outsourcing easier, not harder.
The jobs certainly were not created by the voodoo economics of Reagan and bush 41 had us in a recession so how do you explain it maybe an act of God.
I fail to see why you, Mr. Baldwin, should be advising anyone how to vote - people should be deciding this on their own.
When celebrities try to push - I pull back - the absolute nerve and ego to think your view is more important and more right than anyone else's.
You know, there's a real danger of putting someone like Obama on such a pedestal - you usually get disappointed - just like a poor movie that is over-advertised.
Dear MyThoughts,
Last I heard,... Just because someone is a celebrity, doesn't mean they give up their citizenship.
All celebitries have the right to free speech. Just like all the commentators on the air and,....ye
Do you "pull back" when you favorite pundent says something? What magic crystal ball do they have?
"Nerve and ego"? Nope. It his right as an American citizen. Plain and simple.
Why shouldn't Alec Baldwin have input? Newspapers, radio talk-show hosts, and TV ads are trying to influence our vote constantly. Alec Baldwin shouldn't have any more input than anyone else (unless you go to him for all your big decisions) but he certainly has as much right to express his opinion as anyone else.
Mccain=bush 3
Clinton=clinton 3
Obama=jimmy carter 2
You are a good guy, Alec. So you understand that those of us who oppose Hillary Clinton base our
opposition on far more than her gender?
It it possible that you are one of four Americans who paid attention to Hillary's chiling Umbrella
of Deterrence foreign policy answers in the ignominious ABC debate -- what Rachel Maddow calls "her Exponential Surge"? Hillary has received more campaign money from the defense
industry than any other candidate, Democratic or Republican. In stump speeches in Ohio
and Pennsylvania, as late as yesterday, she has said, "We must win in Iraq."
Hillary is a hawk, plain and simple.
i will not cast my vote for obama do you really no who this man is he is scary!!!!!!!!!!
No I don't, please enlighten me but do so without reference to the guilt by association bull unless it is your contention such things have and will affect policy in a substantive way. If you feel like they will, please explain where and how?????????????
Obama scary? What kind of talk radio/Fox News/right wing blogs do you get your information from?
Try reading either of his books, but especially "The Audacity of Hope," which is a very refreshing application of reason and sanity to our absurdly polarized, dysfunctional political mess. And, yes, it's inspiring. Republicans seem to think that's a bad thing, but we need it after the last seven years.
We finally have a candidate who is brilliant, who knows the Constitution inside and out (having taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago and been president of the Harvard Law Review), a real unifier with a sterling character, and one who has the most amazing temperament, which will be a most important asset for all the work ahead.
"Obama will end this war."
If that goofy remark is in reference to the Democrats' internecine bloodletting, you could be right. He could end it by conceding the nomination to Clinton's wife. If you're referring to the morass in Iraq, thanks for the laughs. Your hero needs to accomplish at least a few little things before he can be seriously considered as the man for the big jobs.
Starry-eyed Obama thralls are an amusing lot.
Please list Hillary's achivements that trump Obama's so badly. His senate records are better than hers, his academic record is better than hers. What has she done that makes her better than Obama? The only thing i can think of is that she has been through the 'vast right wing conspiracy'. Is that what you call experience? That she earns it since she suffered all that for her grand plan to be the president?
and the "right wing conspiracy" just endorsed her.
How about a starry-eyed soldier who wants a candidate who isn't culpable or complicit in his deployment to a war zone?
I'm looking at Clinton's "list of achievements" and speculating as to where this ersatz "experienced hand" emerges.
I will take my chances with Clinton. I liked what Bill Clinton did did or have you forgot he balanced the budget and paid down on the national debt and had a plan to eliminate it. He created several million jobs and put 800,000 new policemen on our crime ridden streets. His biggest sin was getting behind a Bush Reagan bill NAFTA and it's just possible his wife can make that more fair.
You can be for Clinton but there is no 'taking chances' with her. You know what you are getting with her. She will be secretive, like the current administration. She will have a 51-49 strategy and will have to fight and claw at everything she would want to do because the GOP's united hate for her will ensure they refuse to cooperate, out of spite. She will try to get stuff done and will have to sweat out for everything to get through. She will make sure to continue the corporate agenda Bill carried out, making sure to scratch the backs of all those lobbyists that funded her campaign.
Obama is the one where you are 'taking chances'. All evidence points to the vast potential of his presidency. To his restoring habeus corpus, he will respect the constitution. He will bring empathy back into government. Or he could be the next GWB in sheep's clothing. That's a risk that the majority of democrats who have voted hitherto are willing to take.
What use is all this anyway? She lost the nomination, Obama won. She has no mathematically practical way for her to gain victory. Unless the sky falls out of the sky. In that case, you or i have as much probability of being president as she does.
And she will beat McCain if the Obama supporters support the nominee which I intend to do. can you say the same?
Good call. Her administration would be a lot closer to GWB's than we would like to believe. She has the same secretive, ends-justi
Gibbons,
Care to share some links to show me where those 800,000 new cops were placed?
How's about a listing of those jobs, their pay scales and the policies Bill created that in turn created those jobs.
I'll be watching, but not holdin my breath.
Like Chris Rock said,...." I've been a comedian for ten years. I've been married for ten years. If my wife came up on stage. She wouldn't be very funny."
A surgical nurse my have worked side by side with a brain surgeon for eight years,....
Love this post Alec. I was actually starting to appreciate Hillary after the last debate - until her appearance on Keith Olbermann's show on Monday night. What on earth was she cackling about????? Keith even said to her once - No seriously Sen Clinton - only to be laughed at again. Her act is getting old.
I agree - Obama is our best hope.
Hi Jenny, what was it about Hillary in the last debate that impressed you?
Excellent analysis Alec . . . thank you for posting . . . . mccain is bush III and billary is not much better . . . I used to admire bill . . .and thought highly of hillary but that was a long time ago . . .now I no longer trust them . . .
I too urge all PA voters to back Obama . . . we have to end the war in Iraq . . help the Iraqi's rebuild their country which our current administration has destroyed in its greed lust . . .
America has to change its foreign policy in the Middle East drastically . . .anyone who cares about peace and security at home . . . should get out and vote for Obama . . . there will be no peace and security at home unless we are truly working through dialogue for peace abroad . . . more war is not an option . . .
There's some serious soul searching here, sir A, and a great deal of careful consideration for consequences to longtime relationships, I'm sure. I commend your conclusions though, and say that I believe the candidate debate here for the last year was often mischaracterized as being misogyny motivated. Some prefer that explanation to recognition that REAL 'issues' of corporate, and special interest, compromise ...exist.
A few bloggers that I will leave nameless continually express a 'bitter' misandry and then proclaim ANY opposed as making gender THE issue.
I've witnessed and rejoiced, however, that many voters awaken to cause and effect, and demand 'change' that might yet save OUR country. Ending the occupation and saving lives, that are seemingly sacrificed just to drive 'energy' market prices, is the REAL issue and will save OUR economy in the process. Choosing to substitute gender, race, guns or religion as 'reason' to support a candidate does OUR country a great disservice with willful negligence.
I applaud your logic, your decision and your endorsement, sir, and made a similar plea to Pennsylvanians myself as one of the final comments on your previous blog posting. May today's voters there ALSO find it in their self-interest and their heart, to place the welfare of OUR country, and saving EVERY possible life, above any 'lesser' issues.
I appreciate that this article at least attempts to provide some reasoned explanation for your endorsement of one candidate over another, as opposed to so much of the vitriol on this site that normally passes for logic or reasoning. However, if your criterion for voting for President is simply a matter of concluding who will end the war, I fail to see how your argument holds up. Both democratic candidates have pledged to end the war, with different degrees of specificity. It's going to be a lot harder to get out of this war than it was to get into it. The first step is a decision that we must get out--obviously--but after that it is a complicated mess that will require leadership, conviction, luck and perseverance among many other things. It is the right and necessary thing to do, but the real question is, are we (or more likely, "the American public") prepared to accept the uncertainty and inevitable fall-out from doing so? (The answer, of course, is that we must).
The issue is not that both candidates have pledged to end this horrible, tragic war.
The issue is whom do you believe?
HRC has taken more money from the military contractors than all the other candidates combined. She is endorsed by Rupert Murdoch whos news outlets benefit most by continuous war.
Who is lying? It's obvious...
Hillary voted to start the war. Not commenting on her motivation, but Obama made a brave speech not to go into war. There is a difference there. As is often the case, it is useful to see what candidates have been saying before they ran for presidency, and to reflect on the context and political climate at the time. Clinton voted for a war that was popular. Obama spoke out against a war that was popular.
http://www
My first choice was Edwards.
Voted for Obama.
Will vote Obama again.
Hillary Clinton~The Republican in a pantsuit..
Thank you, Alec.
If we end up with a democratic president and a democratic congress, and this war still doesn't end, wellllll, I'd have to say that we've all been hoodwinked!!
Thank you, Mr. Baldwin. Excellent post. Especially love the warning about how we, as a nation, will suffer for this war. We are already, of course, though few people will put it together with the housing crisis and the gas prices, among other consequences. Don't you think that the biggest problem of all is that we can't get the truth through the mainstream media? The war isn't the lead story anymore, like it used to be. Didn't anyone else notice how the war went to page 23 last August, just about the time John McCain's run was gasping for air? The poor Amercan public can't make good decisions about their candidates because they don't know what's true anymore. About anything. And the media keep feeding us crap about guns and bowling and drinking shots. Unbelievable. Where is Cindy Sheehan when we truly need her?
Keep up the great posts, Alec.
"We are already ..."
Some people far more than others and with only carnage, suffering and obscene profits by the perpetrators of the war to show for it.
There is no honorable outcome for all the pain and anguish that some have suffered.
WOW! Now that's a ringing endorsemen
Thank you! The fact that you once considered John McCain as a solution, speaks volumes.
"McCain will be Bush Three. I was wrong about him. (snip) But, if Bush Three is wrong, terrifyingly wrong, then is Clinton Three any better?"
Therein lies the lack of distinctio
Thanks again Alec. For those wags in the past who have suggested that individuals employed within the entertainment industry have no real political insight to offer, I would point to this race, and the increasing number of concerned individuals within that industry who have stood up to the corportists with educated opinion and said "enough".
alienated in Seattle
Indeed. What would life be without the internetz (and googol)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
