We're Angry, Uneducated and Unhealthy-- Now What?

Jeff Jarvis said something that got my fur up: Only Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan had an irrefutable point. 'We've got a totally irrational system of nominating our president,' he said.

It's refutable. Obama looked at how the nominating process was laid out and then built an organization and strategy to win on the terms of the system, rather than close his eyes and try to hit the target and then blame the game for his loss as Clinton and her supporters are doing.

Which kind of president would you rather have -- one who accepts the world as it is and then maps out a way to win, or one that grouses at how irrational it is?

Yeah it's irrational that all the oil is in the Middle East. Now what?

Yeah it's irrational that Bush started a crazy war and that the country's education and health care systems are inadequate to compete in a global economy. Now what?

Our infrastructure is crumbling, our products aren't competitive, we're uneducated, unhealthy, angry and to make matters worse our houses aren't worth shit. Now what?

I want a president who welcomes the chaos and then figures out how we can be smart about the hand we've been dealt. Not one that whines and complains about how irrational the world is.

I can't wait until the Clinton Democrats accept that their time has passed and the world their way worked in has passed too, and let's get on with it.

Comments

[IslandGyal]

Thank you for your piece. Sometimes when I read some pro-Clinton pieces, I feel like I am living in the Twilight Zone. I prefer a president who devises a way to win with the hand he's dealt, and then will proceed to change from within, if it's proved the system is flawed. I didn’t hear any complaints about the system when Bill Clinton ran and won with it.

[RedDogBear]

"Sometimes when I read some pro-Clinton pieces, I feel like I am living in the Twilight Zone."
Glad I'm not the only one that feels that way.

[burnt]

yes! I can easily devise a *MORE* rational primary system and have to conclude that others can as well... especially if we all add thoughts towards a solution to what many point to as irrationality of the Party's process. And of course, it would be a great deal easier to devise a less rational process.

The rules aren't terribly irrational, not are they completely rational... depends upon where a given individual sits at any given moment and the goals of the party's rules and bylaws committee. It's their party. We all have the opportunity to submit suggestions to them for changes before the next cycle.

However, your main point is THE point... Obama outcampaigned the Clinton Party in every respect except divisiveness, baiting, smear, lying and Party damage. The Clintons self-destructed. They did everything they could to lose this primary and it worked for them... months ago. Obama, on the other hand, actually wanted to win... and he did so using the rules that the DNC established and to which all candidates agreed upon prior to the primary.

[Mesaywar]

Absolutely on target. We are long overdue for some reality-based leadersip. Sooner, rather than later, Clinton supporters need to get used to not allowing themselves to be lied to.

[lynnn]

You are writing the hard truth. Both Dems and Repubs would rather blame ppl for our problems than get stuff done.

[lynnn]

Short and sweet.

[NorVaGal]

Mr. Winer: I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. However, irrationality, like everything else in the world is in the eyes of the beholder. Sen. Clinton and her supporters appear to think that she ran a completely rational campaign and they blame her failures on everyone and everything except her and themselves.

Arguments pro and con for each candidate are viewed as rational or irrational according to the respective side presenting the talking points. It is a problem as old as the beginning of time. And, corporate media and the ethernet gleefully fan the flames.

Even the definition of irrationality appears to preclude the possiblity of sanity prevailing. For that very reason, once the olive branch has been extended and a (brief) period of healing is observed, those who continue to refuse to face reality must be abandoned and our energies concentrated on others who are at least willing to use some critical thinking skills to make informed decisions.

Based on the behavior of the more hard-core Clintonistas and the Clinton campaign's continued fanning of the flames of irrationality, there comes a time when rational minds must say no more, and move on.

[mbaty]

Exactly, but I think one of the major problems is the unwillingness of our leaders to see things as they are now. Denail and blame are huge obstacles to simply doing what needs to be done to make sure this country fulfills it's true destiny of freedom and justice for all. We have the means, and some of us have the will, but there are many ways, and we need a leader with practical wisdom. Someone who's not in it for money and power, even if that comes their way. But rather, someone with compassion and foresight--and preferably someone who can write their own speech--like Obama, for instance. Someone who can articulate a coherent thought for a change.

[lisakaz2]

Awesome post. I've pretty much given up on conventional medicine since they say I have MS and can't do spit. I say I have mercury poisoning and am trying to detoxify. That's my personal "now what?" since the other folks don't give me a path forward.

[dill]

Thank you!!!

[funnyguy]

Bravo!

[Softnsweet]

Awesome post!

[XME]

"Which kind of President would you rather have -- one who accepts the world as it is and then maps out a way to win, or one that grouses at how irrational it is."

It's sad we even have to ask! I understand Clinton's supporters are passionate...so are Obama's. What I don't understand is those who view this as being "stolen" from her, that the "other side" cheated. This anger is sorely misplaced...Obama didn't create that mess. But more importantly, this anger should be focused on the last 8 years and on the man whose policies would make things worse if he's elected. By acting like Obama is their enemy, that he's Hillary's "spoiler" and he's somehow unfairly taken this from her and from women, they are portraying the worst some claim of women.

It brings to mind the saying, "Hell hath no fury, like a woman scorned", and behaving in this manner hurts women, and sadly, it hurts Clinton's legacy and reputation if her supporters vote for a candidate whose views oppose Clinton's out of protest and revenge. Our troops, economy, and citizens deserve better than a bunch of women who vote against our own best interest because they're angry that Clinton didn't win the nomination. To behave in that manner is belittling our right to vote, and is a slap in the face to our troops who fight for our freedoms.

[lisakaz2]

I suspect a fix by Fixed News types, which is why they nary say a bad word about her now.

[khttk98]

I know if you listen to most pundits that as a 42 year old woman I should be firmly in the Clinton camp but I have been an Obama supporter since the early days. If the situations were reversed I would be resolved to supporting Clinton. Some of her supporters do act as if the nomination has been stolen from her. How can they help but feel that way when old school politics says that you should wait your turn. I cannot believe that older women would give up all the hard fought battles of the great women that have come before us in order to vote for McCain to "punish" Obama. Women's rights have been compromised by the Bush administration and with two possible Supreme Court appointments on the horizon these women need to take a hard look at what they could do to our daughters future rights. Is it worth it? Obama has come from so far behind it's amazing. You are right Mr. Winer. I stand behind the man or woman that sees the situation clearly and forms the best plan to move us forward. Bring on the chaos we are ready!

[rnb]

There are some people who would (rightly) point out that the mistakes of the past cannot be rectified until they are identified. However, as important as it is to recognize that failing to understand history dooms one to repeat it, it is also important to recognized that simply understanding history doesn't equate to not repeating it. One must also have the ability to forge a new path, and that requires more than just historical understanding.