Scapegoat du Jour: Wes Clark

Let me get "full disclosure" out of the way: Barack Obama was not my first choice for the Democratic nominee. I was onboard for John Edwards until he dropped out. But since I live in Arizona, which voted on Feb. 5, I had to make a choice between Barack and Hillary. I wanted to vote for the candidate who most represented my views, who had the best chance to win in November and who had the best command of the issues. To me, that was Obama. Hillary was too tied to the traditional power structure of DC and was too aligned with the DLC, which seems to be content with letting the GOP set the agenda. I would enthusiastically support Clinton were she the nominee, just as I support Obama.



I just wish he wasn't so wishy-washy. Last week's "stand" on FISA was extremely disappointing but I understood that his statement was not out of line with his previous positions. If he doesn't take the lead on defeating the bill in the Senate later this month, then I'll be beyond disappointed: I'll be pissed! But many progressive bloggers saw the FISA stand as a sell-out, capitulation to Mr. 28% Approval and a sign of the Apocalypse - or at least a sign that a Democratic victory in November might not be a sure thing. Much hand-wringing and "purity trolling" ensued.



Of course, FISA was just another in a series of reasons that Obama was going to lose support. The week before it was Bill Clinton, who reportedly said that Obama was going to have to kiss his ass to get him to actively campaign. Many pointed out that Bill didn't exactly have a positive impact on Hillary's campaign. So if Bill Clinton didn't campaign for Obama, the Dems would lose; conversely, if Bill Clinton did campaign for Obama, Dems were going to lose. Now, we have Gen. Wesley Clark to blame for more damage - for saying exactly what I've been thinking for months. How does getting shot down and held as a POW qualify John McCain to be Commander-in-Chief? (Insert standard disclaimer of honoring him for his service here). But the right-wing piled on, as did the supposedly Dem "pro-Hillary" (read "anti-Obama") blogs.



I actually don't think Clark went far enough. Because McCain was held virtually incommunicado during the most turbulent, violent, culture-shifting period in our nation's history, you have to wonder if he really understands what this country went through in the late Sixties. I think it's fair to ask if McCain understands the lessons of Vietnam, of the civil rights movement, and the cultural shift of the Sixties and Seventies. Now, those of you who weren't there - or too young to grasp it, like Obama - might rightfully point out that you didn't have to live it to understand it. That's much different than coming back to the country after a number of years - and not having any idea what your contemporaries went through.



But Obama doesn't see it that way.

"As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/mccain_camp_calls_clark_commen.html

So now we have Gen. Clark to add to the pile of blame for the Dems defeat...



Unless you do something about it and voice your support for the General. Write to Obama and the media. Please. And be positive. If we keep tearing down our candidate for perceived shifts to the center, or whatever, we will have blood on our hands when McCain is elected and pursues his dangerous foreign policy in Iraq and Iran.

Welcome to the Blame Blog

Hello. You may know me from the Great Orange Satan blog known as Daily Kos, where I occasionally add my two cents. I decided to start my own blog to have a quieter space to express my thoughts not only on politics but other topics that interest me, such as culture, sex, music, kids, the environment and the internet.

The underlying theme of this blog is going to be personal accountability. In the real world, my job involves holding employees of a huge corporation accountable for their decisions. Basically, I go through reams of information, looking for anomalies. A typical discussion with a co-worker would sound something like this: ME: "OK, so can you explain to me why you made this particular decision to do something that not only violates company policy but screws over our customers and likely opens the company up to a lawsuit?" CO-WORKER: "It's not my fault the policy is stupid and another department gave me bad data!" ME: "What have you done to address what you feel is a stupid policy?" CO-WORKER: "Huh?" ME: "What are you doing with the other department to fix the bad data and make sure it doesn't happen again?" CO-WORKER: "Dude. That's too much work". This is a particularly fun conversation when it's with somebody a few steps higher on the corporate ladder. Although to be fair, executives don't usually call me "Dude".

It's kind of like that on the internet. It's much easier to snark about somebody else than to offer a solution that is actually within your control. If you're going to blame somebody else for all of the ills of the world, you need to offer a solution. It's kind of like that in politics too. Look at everything Bush fucked up. Now look at all the times he actually took responsibility. Um, yeah. I can't think of a single instance either. But what did you do to offer a solution? Politics is personal. These clowns are supposed to represent us. Voting every two or four years is not enough. So go ahead and cast as much blame wherever you want. All I ask is that you do something positive to fix the problem.