Why, in Spite of Everything, I Still Love Obama

Sometimes, you need to go away to keep your love alive. Perhaps it's the change of air. Perhaps it's the change of view. Perhaps it's just the chance to stop and pause. Who knows what it is that melts away the doubts, and the disappointment? But when I gazed at my beloved, at Lake Garda last weekend, I realized that, in spite of everything, my love still burned bright.

Hey, it's true, he looked tired. He's cut back on the jokes now. He's cut back on the smiles. But when he stepped out, in my hotel room, or perhaps I should say on the giant flat-screen telly in my hotel room, I felt a stirring that wasn't like the flicker of excitement you have on an early date, when fantasies blaze, and hopes soar. What I felt was something calmer, but also stronger: the sense that I, or perhaps the 65 million Americans who voted on my behalf, had chosen well.

Barack Obama, it has to be said, looked quite stern. But you probably should look a bit stern when you're announcing the start of something that will put the lives of some of your citizens at serious risk, and will almost certainly lead to the deaths of innocent men and women. You probably should look a bit stern when you're spending millions of taxpayers' dollars at a time when many of the people who paid the taxes don't have jobs. And when you don't actually have a clue where it's going to lead.

Obama, like every other person on the face of this planet, doesn't know if bombing certain targets in Tripoli, and Benghazi, and Misrata, is going to get rid of Muammar Gaddafi, or if it's just going to strengthen his resolve. He doesn't know if the bombs will just destroy machinery, and kill soldiers, or if they're going to kill men and women who are used as human shields. He doesn't know if the so-called rebels, who said they didn't want international help, and then that they did, but might change their minds again, and who are mostly about as experienced in using AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades as I am, will be able to stand up against a trained army, and highly paid mercenaries, and massive supplies of arms that the West sold them, and now wishes it hadn't. He doesn't know if this is the kind of military action that can be done quite quickly and cleanly, or if, like most military action, and even military action that looks as though it can be done quickly and cleanly, it can't.

It is, presumably, because he doesn't know these things that he took a while to weigh them up. He may have thought, like David Cameron, that a "no-fly zone" sounded like a good idea, but he probably also thought you didn't get one just by telling the people who would have flown there that they shouldn't. He may have thought that what you had to do to stop people flying there may have been too risky, or too complicated, or too likely to lead to things you couldn't control, to be worth doing. This may be why, when he said he had decided to take action to impose one, he didn't sound like a hero who was going to save people from a terrible situation, and who expected a round of applause. He sounded like a man who had had to make a very, very difficult decision. And who knew that you couldn't know whether some decisions were right or wrong, but that you just had to live with the consequences of the one you'd made.

He also sounded like a man who knew that everyone was saying that he'd been dithering, but who thought that there were more important things in life than whether people thought you were dithering. He sounded like a man who knew that, whatever people said about him, and however much the Right might think he was a socialist who was trying to destroy the country, and however much the Left might think he was someone who had promised the sun, the moon and the stars and delivered instead a country that was in the grip of a massive economic crisis, there were certain things that had happened since he'd become president that had made the world better.

He might, for instance, have been thinking about the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was the first Act he signed when he became president, and which offered basic protections against pay discrimination for women and older workers. He might have been thinking about the healthcare reform bill, which he passed a year ago, and which meant that 32 million Americans who didn't, in the world's richest nation, have access to a doctor, now did. Or the START treaty he signed with President Dmitry Medvedev, which cut, and committed both countries to continue to cut, the world's stock of nuclear weapons. He might also have been thinking of the $798bn economic stimulus plan he launched in 2009, which almost undoubtedly saved America from greater economic disaster, or the Wall Street reform bill he passed last summer, which aimed to protect ordinary Americans from abusive financial practices, and taxpayers from future bailouts, and which represented a victory over some of the most powerful lobbying forces in the land. He might have been thinking of the fact that he created more private sector jobs last year than George W. Bush did in eight years.

The 44th President of the United States, and first black leader of the Western world, who has, arguably, done more for the majority of Americans than any president since Roosevelt, and who has been careful to send out the message that America is no longer seeking swashbuckling adventures on the world stage, and who has done more for gay rights than any president in history, may well have been thinking that politics is a difficult, and complicated, and stressful business, and that it means you have to make impossible choices, while working with people you don't like, and whose political views you abhor. And that the results are unlikely to set people cheering, because people tend not to look at politicians who are in office, and cheer.

I'm not sure that when I see Obama, I want to cheer. I want, instead, to say that in the very imperfect world we live in, with the vested, and opposing, interests that make any kind of change a compromise, this thoughtful, pragmatic and sometimes irritating politician is probably as good as it gets.

 

Follow Christina Patterson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/queenchristina_

Comments

[zlydonna]

07:53 PM on 04/18/2011

Not only am I hopeful, I am optimistic.

The people of Wisconsin are leading a true progressive revolution.  WE are the people we've been waiting for, remember?

Communicating the Democratic agenda should not be left solely to President Obama. Where are the other Democratic leaders?  Where is the House Minority Leader; the Senate Majority Leader; the Congressmen and Congresswomen--especially from the states who have Republican governors; the DNC leadership, state Democratic Party leaders; Union leaders; ALL the rest of the Democrats?   The bully pulpit can't be used to combat every single attack, otherwise it would be rendered ineffective. 

The Republicans have a communications machine backed by almost unlimited corporate money.  They also have their own propaganda network.  It is difficult for the Democrats, who can't even get equal access on other major media, to compete with that, but they must try, and we must encourage and support them.

President Barack Hussein Obama is doing a fantastic job. It is jaw-dropping to realize all he has accomplished in such a short time.  The Administration does not 'advertise' all of its policy achievements, perhaps because our major media has little regard for serious policy discussion. This may be for the best, given how facts are often missing from the debate.

President Obama's actual 'base' will help him get re-elected, and we will do it with pride and enthusiasm.

[Marcospinelli]

05:15 PM on 03/30/2011

To those who spew rhetoric like, "Look at how impatient they are.  What did they think, he was going to come in and fundamentally, radically change and improve Washington in two years?",  I don't think anybody thought that.  I certainly didn't.  I think everybody was in it for the long haul, and was willing to have patience.  

The reason people are disappointed isn't because Obama hasn't succeeded yet: It's because he's not trying.  He's doing the opposite.  Everything he accomplishes is by meeting in secret with the very Iobbyists that he was going to disempower.  

Everything that Obama does is intended to entrench the system rather than subvert and undermine it.  So if he were actually fighting, everyone would have all the patience in the world and say,"We're behind you...It's going to take a long time...(We know that) you can't unentrench powerful interests quickly", etc.  The disappointment is that he's not trying; he's doing the opposite.  

The proof of that is evident on a daily basis.

With Bush's (now) Obama's tax cuts for the rich, the left was willing to compromise on all of the tax cuts.  Obama's deal on the tax cuts for the rich wind doesn't cover the 99ers and increases taxes on the poor.  

The left comes to the table already having compromised our positions. On everything.  All the time.  We have done the compromising for more than 30 years.

And even after we compromise, after we have deals, Republicans renege and Democrats still cave some more.  One example of that is the Capps amendment.  That was the compromise AGREEMENT on abortion in Obama's healthcare legislation. 

In the end, with the Stupak amendment and Obama's executive order, Obama and Democrats have put us firmly on the path of ending all insurance coverage for abortions.

 http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/17/gwu-study-yes-the-stupak-amendment-would-end-coverage-of-abortion-services-over-time/

Fairly soon, Roe and overturning it is going to be moot with all that Republicans have managed to get Democrats to "compromise" on, making getting an abortlon impossible. As it is now, you can't get an abortlon in 87 percent of the counties in the US.  [It's now up to 92 percent.]

KEEP READING

[LazarusRises]

09:33 PM on 03/30/2011

VERY ASTUTE!!!! Fanned. :-)

You nailed my frustration with O. perfectly. I too was willing to support him & new Hope & Change could be a slow process. I never expected he was actually no better than WE. & probably worse having the worst of both W. & Carter. Terrible combination.

[Marcospinelli]

10:22 PM on 03/30/2011

By the way, SinglePayer universal healthcare was the compromise.  SinglePayer wasn't our first, best proposal.  We've already have been denied our first best proposal:  A level playing field where we all could rise and share in the obscene corporate profits that come at the expense of so many people's lives. We've lost to a corporate mentality that it's a 'dog eat dog'-world, where making a living isn't enough (or even possible); only 'making a kiIIing'.

Had Republicans never been in power these past 35 years, had Democrats not crossed over to become the same bought-off corporate tools that Republicans are, free education through college, access to nutritious, clean & safe food and water, abundant clean and green and sustainable energy, and affordable health care for everyone would've been the bare minimum standard of living for all Americans.  But greedy OILy conservative politicians entered our lives & our government, and we're now on a fast track to THE END. 

A weak PublicOption was whittled down into a trigger and then dropped altogether.  There are no cost controls in the healthcare legislation, but plenty of protections for continued gouging by insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

The latest Democratic caving is over the budget.

When the budget process began, Republican congressman PaulRyan came out with the first number that Republicans wanted to cut ($32 billion). Then there was a TeaParty revolt in the House, and Republicans in the House said "Fine, you win, $64 billion."  

So now they're at $64 billion and Democrats have moved all the way over to where Paul Ryan was when the process began.  So even if Democrats get that number (which in Washington would be considered a "win" for Democrats), Democrats have gone all the way over to where the Republican leadership thought their opening bid would be.   Ultimately the cuts are going to be very dramatic, more so than anyone in either party thought was wise a couple of months ago -- NOBODY is representing the interests of the poor and middle classes.

Nothing is going to change until and unless Obama and Democratic politicians make the decision to engage.  Democratic voters thought they'd made the decision in 2006 and in 2008 when they put Obama and Democrats in power.  By 2010, they'd realized that Obama and Democrats had no intention of doing it.

[zlydonna]

07:07 PM on 03/31/2011

What magical words should the Democrats use to get the Republicans to cooperate?

I don't even know what will be in the final Budget currently being negotiated. Do you?

Whether you like it or not, we have to negotiate. Perhaps if more Democrats had not held on to their grievances to the point of not voting, we might have retained our majority in the House. Next time you slam the Tea Party people for voting against their own best interest, consider your own attitude. By doing nothing, we lost our advantage, which set us back at least 2 years. Don't say shout out progressive ideals, help us do the work necessary to make actual progress.

[zlydonna]

04:27 PM on 03/29/2011

The ideological 'purity' of the Far Left is one reason why the Democrats have often been unable to strategical plan effective ways to further the progressive agenda. Insisting on giant leaps in political thought and action sound ARE great talking points, and these wonderful ideals are a great rallying cry. But as progressives, we must recognize that effective leadership involves persuading others to your point of view. The slowness of that process is frustrating and time-consuming, but it works.

We have a heath care and Insurance reform platform. Instead of continuing the anger over not getting single-payer right away, we should be planning how to strengthen the reform we have. While we are fighting about 'purity', the republicans are trying to dismantle the gains we have already made. Stop beating up President Obama and the rest of the Congressional Democrats. They made great sacrifices to pass reform legislation. Give them the props they deserve and the help and support they require. Why is it so hard to forgive your friends for not being perfect? "Why can't we all just get along?" I mean that in a completely non ironic way.

[Marcospinelli]

04:37 PM on 03/30/2011

Instead of continuing the anger over not getting single-payer right away, we should be planning how to strengthen the reform we have.

====================================================================

How do we get to single payer (or even a public option) with Obama's healthcare legislation?

Step-by-step.  Lay it out.

[zlydonna]

06:17 PM on 03/31/2011

I think we will get single payer. Why does the progressive left give up so easily? The Republicans are creating a trap for themselves. They will push things so far, that the only solution to the crisis will be single payer system. We have at least 2 years to work toward that solution and get people elected who will legislate for it.

Also, just as with Gay marriage, it might have to be a state by state battle. I live in California. I think our budget problems and the cost of medi-cal will lay the groundwork for some kind of non-profit government health insurance system. I still live in hope.

[LazarusRises]

09:37 PM on 03/30/2011

With the price paid for Obamacare, do you think the Democrats are going to revisit the issue within the next 5 or 6 centuries? O. had it in his hand & blew it because he was NEVER a Liberal. He is as Liberal as W. His Supreme Court appointments are slightly better & he reversed W. on stem cell research. Otherwise, he has essentially continued & embraced all of W.'s policies.

Friends can be forgiven. Traitors cannot.

[zlydonna]

06:30 PM on 03/31/2011

President Obama is a liberal and a pragmatist. He has the same ideals we have. But the ideal is the endgame, not the starting point. He certainly knows more about governing issues than you or I.

Single payer was NOT in his hands. They did not have the votes. An 'all or nothing' strategy is not only unrealistic, it is counter-productive. We have a foundation now. Let's build on it.

He is not George Bush. He has a different political point of view, a different operational style, different motives and intent. He loves this country and I think you know in your heart he is trying to find a way to do the best for us. Just because something looks the same on the outside doesn't mean it IS the same.

Think about how much you know, then think about how much more you DON'T know about the inside game, and what it takes to move a barely functional legislative branch.

[MaryfromIL]

03:23 PM on 03/29/2011

Here is an example of a new program Obama wants, that you can look at two ways, called Feed the Future. It provides agricultural assistance to third world countries. 25% of our foreign aid went to agriculture in the 1980's, then it dropped to 1%. It does things like provide a cow to a desperate family, allowing the children to attend school and making a huge difference to their lives.

Feed the Future was designed to fund 10 countries, but the House will only fund 2 or 3.

Part of the blame falls to the administration itself, which has given Feed the Future little public emphasis and developed few congressional advocates.

One view would be how poorly Obama is advancing this new initiative. He's had issues with follow-through on good ideas before, as in Loan Modification. Another Epic Fail.

But I prefer the view that says Obama saw a need, created Feed the Future, but is stymied by the political reality of a Republican House. I agree he sometimes has poor follow through. But I also understand when in the middle of a storm, things don't always get done as hoped for. And he's been at the center of a storm of man made and natural catastrophes since even before he took office, he's the lightening rod.

Instead of complaining about it, I call or write the White House and my congress people. I'm as responsible as Obama for working with my congressional representatives. He can't do it alone.

[julescator]

04:05 PM on 03/29/2011

I agree. He said that when he was running. He said he couldn't do it along. This is the first of heard of this program and it's a winner the way you explained it.

Obama has sorry Cabinet Members. He should not have to do all of the jobs. I am noticing that people want HIM because he is thoughtful and competent and most of his Cabinet members pale in comparison. He needs to make them work. I liked that he sent Hilllary Clinton out to speak to us on Thursday and sent Gates and Hillary to cover the Sunday shows. It's their jobs. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense need to explain Lybia to us. They speak FOR the President.

[MaryfromIL]

04:19 PM on 03/29/2011

It was the first I heard of the program too. Obama had the worst PR dept in the history of recent presidents, hopefully it will improve.

I agree with you about Cabinet members. I couldn't understand why Hillary disappeared into the job, she never struck me as a retiring person. Heck, Cheney & Rumsfeld pretty much WERE the White House during Bush years..

[MaryfromIL]

04:31 PM on 03/29/2011

Forgot, here is the link to my local paper with a description of the program:

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110329/discuss/703299916/

[susanlno]

08:46 AM on 03/29/2011

Obama epitomizes the medieval America we’ve become. He’s abetting Wall Street’s war on the working class (lords versus serfs), he’s happily continuing the Bush/Chene­y policies of indefinite imprisonme­nt and torture, and not only has he enthusiast­ically carried on both of Bush/Chene­y’s illegal wars, he’s decided to start one of his own. So what's "love" got to do with it?

[julescator]

04:07 PM on 03/29/2011

I totally disagree. He is trying to move us forward while the GOP what to take us BACKWARDS to the Founding Fathers. They fight him at every turn. It's become unbearable for most Americans who will put the GOP out of business in the next election so we can progress!

[susanlno]

05:20 PM on 03/29/2011

I wish I could agree with you, but the Democrats, including Obama, are far too beholden to corporate interests, just like the Republicans. The main reason, perhaps even the only reason, the Republicans are fighting Obama is that they don't want the Democrats to win, even when Democrats implement Republican ideas--like the "Affordable Care Act," which was called "RomneyCare" when it was passed in Massachusetts, but now is reviled on the right as "socialized medicine" and a "government takeover of health care." Even the most progressive Democrats--and Obama is a long, long way from being one of them--will toe the party line when pressured, rather than standing on principle OR acting in their constituents' best interests. Too often, Obama's idea of "change" is the status quo (as in the no-strings-attached bank bailout) or the status quo with a few tweaks around the edges (as in the so-called "health care reform"). We need more change than that.

[LazarusRises]

09:45 PM on 03/30/2011

He has not only embraced & continued W.'s failed policies. He has now entered the nation into a 3rd war & appears to be considering acting in Mexico's Dru Wars, Syria & Iran. That is neither progress nor Hope & Change I can Believe In. That is simply more of the same which has so rapidly crushed our country.

[nkadzi]

08:22 AM on 03/29/2011

Except for your very long sentences (I had to catch a breath when reading one the paragraphs), you persuaded me to see and understand the predicament President Obama is facing. Thank you.

[PukkaDemocrat]

06:34 AM on 03/29/2011

Everytime I see complaints about the President, I shake my head.

You progressiv­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­e­­­­s have to realize that you are a tiny minority in this country. The sooner you realize it and completely support the democratic party, the better for all of us. President Obama is the best you're ever going to get. Better start being grateful to him for his hard work.

Furthermor­e, the individual mandate is going to happen whether you progressiv­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­e­­­­s and teabaggers like it or not. Sure, the individual mandate isn't perfect, but perfect is the enemy of the good. At least some people will still get subsidies to buy private health insurance. Half a pie is better than no pie. THERE JUST AREN'T ENOUGH VOTES IN CONGRESS FOR ANYTHING BETTER!

Besides, the public option was NEVER central to health care reform. The Exchanges will take care of everything essential.

Obama is playing a very delicate game of chess with the Republican­­­­­­­­­­­­s­. All the progressiv­­­­­­­­­­­­e dissent is very disturbing to Obama and his real supporters­­­­­­­­­­­­. But it IS music to the Republican­­­­­­­­­­­­s­' ears! SO STOP COMPLAININ­­G!

And cheer up -- soon, ALL 50 million + of the irresponsi­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­b­­­­l­­­­e fools out there without health insurance who are clogging up our ERs will be forced to buy health insurance. And if they don't, they'll pay a fine. I hope all the stubborn, selfish holdouts lose their homes.

[nolabels]

07:27 AM on 03/29/2011

You do realize that tiny minorities can be absolutely correct. You sound like a Fox news fan when you make arguments about how many more people you have on your side.

It's the fatalism of people like you who are holding this country back.

Do you like being mistreated by your supposed representatives? Stockholm syndrome?

[susanlno]

12:49 PM on 03/29/2011

You did mean this sarcastically--right? Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense.

[PukkaDemocrat]

04:36 PM on 03/29/2011

Not at all, and quite the contrary, everything I say makes perfect sense. I challenge you to find ONE THING I said to be different from Democrat policy. Sure, I can be a bit abrasive, but essentially, I am completely in the right.

[Marcospinelli]

09:16 PM on 03/28/2011

We are now in an open-ended civil war in Libya.

[LazarusRises]

10:27 PM on 03/30/2011

With Mexico, Syria & Iran on deck. O. will show W. how to wage war & bankrupt the nation in a truly serious fashion & without any basis or merritt at all. What a guy???

[TippyCanoe]

03:42 PM on 03/28/2011

Ms. Patterson is so blinded in her prom king admiration perhaps she doesn't realize that the NeoCons love Obama as much as she does.

As if the non-closure of Gitmo and escalation of war in Afghanistan wasn't bad enough, as if... the four-fold increase of drone bombings of innocent civilians in Pakistan, the bombings in Somalia, Yemen, the continuing war in Iraq and building of new military bases there weren't a bad indication, as if the renewal of the Patriot Act, the American assassination program via executive decree, as if the 'indefinite detention' program to hold people in jails forever without charges, as if DHS and TSA violating your 4th amendment rights, as if the absolute torture of Bradley Manning wasn't enough for you, Obama has now engaged in a 6th war & bombing campaign in Libya. The bodies are stacking up. Today, 90% of deaths due to war are innocent civilians.

It's not a legacy that I would applaud. Frankly, it's getting rather embarrassing for you now.

[23skidoo]

01:13 AM on 03/29/2011

yes, but he furrowed his brow with concern before he did all those things, hadn't you noticed?

Obama's greatest accomplishment is he made the Left as stupid as the Right. How's that for bipartisanship?

[nolabels]

01:25 AM on 03/29/2011

Seriously. "He's our guy" is simply not an argument on the merits. But now, that's all either side argues. Sad part is each side's "guys" are not theirs at all.

[LazarusRises]

01:29 AM on 03/29/2011

The fallacy of your statement is that O. is as far right as W. ever was.

[23skidoo]

02:43 PM on 03/28/2011

nothing like an absence of facts and fixation on image to really make a political point. Unless of course, this is satire. In which case, ha ha! nice one!

[Marcospinelli]

01:20 PM on 03/28/2011

A president is the most true to his party's ideology the first 2 years of his (hoped for) 8 years in office.  Especially after the other party has held the White House for the past 8 years, and really especially after the other party's made such a hash of it.  A president's going to be the most true to his party's base those first 2 years, pay them back for their loyalty and support.   

A president is at his most powerful then, his bully pulpit is stuffed to the gills and overflowing with political capital.  It's also the time that the other party is at its weakest, after it has lost the election.  

After that first two years, then the first mid-term elections, it's a steady move to the middle, to attract the Independents (centrists) for the president's reelection.

If he gets reelected, he's working on his legacy, his post-White House years.  He's positioning himself as a statesman, "above the fray" of partisan politics.  He's looking for his place on the world stage.

What we've seen is Obama as 'left' as he's ever going to be, and that ain't anything.  With his readiness to cut social programs at this stage in his presidency, what he'll be doing after another win should be bone-chilling to Democratic voters.  Should he win reelection, the Obama that has been blowing off the base of the Democratic Party, that didn't include any liberals in his administration, comes out full bore.

[enaidhtims]

01:43 PM on 03/28/2011

I'll be amazed if what you predict doesn't come true. I am really concerned about what he'll do after he is re-elected. At this point, if Obama keeps on the way he is headed, he may make Gerald Ford look like a liberal. Or Bob Dole.

[LazarusRises]

01:31 AM on 03/29/2011

or W.

[gigantor21]

12:43 PM on 03/28/2011

I agree with the general premise--that people criticize him too much, either for stuff he doesn't have much control over or that isn't even true to begin with. But I see nothing good in this kind of fawning over any public official. This came off as sycophantic and mushy to me.

[sonoramar]

12:29 PM on 03/28/2011

I still love him too. He may not be perfect, but at least I feel like I can relax a little. I don't have to worry on a constant basis about how Bush/Cheney are going to screw me and the entire country - or the world for that matter - over next!

My only hope for Obama (and the Democrats) would be that they stand up to the Repubs a little more. There is so much Repub stupidity just waiting to be brought to light. The Dems always think they have to take the high road. Politics is a dirty game.

I continue to wish nothing but the best for the President and the First Lady and will definitely be voting for him again in 2012!!!!

[Bellanova]

12:36 AM on 03/29/2011

"at least I feel like I can relax a little. I don't have to worry on a constant basis about how Bush/Chene­y are going to screw me and the entire country - or the world for that matter - over next!"

With all due respect, this statement proves that the ruling elite made the right choice in backing Obama for president. He delivers everything they've hoped for without the abrasive effect of Bush/Cheney, and lulls Americans (and not only) to complacency while continuing the politics as usual.

[LazarusRises]

01:33 AM on 03/29/2011

How can you be blind to the fact he is ruling virtually the same way W. did? Please, open your eyes.

[EdCorner]

12:23 PM on 03/28/2011

I'm afraid the author has revealed her true colors. Politicans work for us so falling in love with a politician is like falling in love with a contractor you hired to work on your house. You know, landscaper or carpenter, except in this case this politican is nowhere around. There is a certain perversion to this whole rant of an article.

“Glad to Be Unhappy”, The Mamas and the Papas

Unrequited love’s a bore, yeah
And I’ve got it pretty bad
But for someone you adore, yeah
It’s a pleasure to be sad…

Will Shakespeare : “Love is the most beautiful of dreams and the worst of nightmares.”

The best analogy I can think of is falling in love with a serial killer. Beyond your physical reach and in love with what your mind believes about this person despite all the fact.

Love and politics don't mix - at least not in a healthy way and voting for someone you love without researching the facts is very poor way to treat all your conscientious voting brothers and sisters.

[Bellanova]

12:37 AM on 03/29/2011

Very good points, Ed.

[LazarusRises]

01:35 AM on 03/29/2011

Well spoken & quite true.

[duuwanye]

12:12 PM on 03/28/2011

Why, in spite of everything, I still think Obamas hot