Letters to the Editor
-
Salon Agendas Aside
I think Conason did a credible job this time, and there was even a little bit of thinly veiled pro-Obama code at the end there. Maybe Joe's just not ready to throw down altogether yet? Hell, everybody loves a winner. The facts remain, however, and any way the "flareup" is spun, Ms. Clinton comes out second in it. That despite the fact she got the golden opportunity to really work Obama. She flunked a major test in this exchange, and I don't see Conason dancing around that fact very vigorously. In fact, he seems to want to say he favors Obama in this - but, like Clinton did, comes up a little short.
I do favor Obama, by the way, and have the entire time. I look at the candidates one by one, just as I always have, and I don't give a rat's ass about the gender factor. I just want someone eminently better than what we've visited upon ourselved and then continued to tolerate instead of rising up righteously and throwing the bums out. Short of that sort of true American spirit the least we can do is scrutinize the field. The Republicans have nothing to offer (as has so often been the case since I became old enough to vote), so that's out, as is the rest of the Democratic field. We are left with Obama and Clinton, and one is definitely, in my oh-so-humble estimation, almost a no-brainer.
Let's try to get past race, gender, name recognition and, essentially, everything we know about the past. Those who fail to learn history may be doomed to repeat it, but those who know nothing but history are guaranteed never to progress beyond the endless cycle of variations on a losing theme.
I think Conason, in his very circumspect way, was hinting at this. I also think we're past the nod-and-smile point. It's time to stand up and do something really odd: go with what we don't know. Obama can lead us through the learning curve.