Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:32 AM - Edit history (1)
Her stances on gay rights, minorities, immigrants, abortion, family planning, equal pay for equal work, educating girls, against violence against women, forced marriage, for child care, health care and support for women and children have garnered extreme hatred from right wing religionists.
These are HUGE issues to many Americans. For whom they are not, well, they can go their own way and stop the pretense of being the allies of those whom these are life and death, quality of life and maintaing our freedoms under secular, progressive law issues.
I saw many of those who left the Democratic Party in 2008, many of them were HRC supporters. It left a bitter taste in my mouth I cannot forget and bet a lot of others have not forgotten it either. It was a gut wrenching experience but realized they were not allies to our principles.
But that cannot describe who HRC really is, not really. Anymore than many terming themselves the 'followers of Christ' are representative of his work or message, a good one that centuries later encouraged many to support the social safety net and fight the social darwinists. Not by relying on the church, but seeing the government as the a democraticl force able to take care of those who are unknown to many and unchurched as well.
She's not a RW kind of Christian and the wingers know it well. It's silly to pretend she's a right winger on the basis of her religious belief when one looks at her with a clear eye. Many very liberal people took their cues in guiding their life from the Golden Rule and the belief we are all brothers and sisters. Not that they are perfect or effective in their applications.
All that being said, HRC is not my first choice for nominee, but I'll support her in the general if she makes it through the process. She needs make the case clearly so that anyone can understand her stances.
Warren stated repeatedly she is not running and supports HRC. Sanders has stated clearly that he does not think she will lead in the ways he thinks we need to go but supports her on social issues. But I doubt he would stand aside and let her fail against the nightmare that the GOP is sure to nominate.
She has the support of most of the progressives and liberals who have been activists for many years and she is from an older generation. I'd have to perform a bit of mental gymnastics to see her as favorably as I have seen Obama. I do not see in her the same qualities for leadership that he has, but neither did I in Biden who is excellent in his role beside Obama.
I'll vote for her in the end if that's what it takes. I hope the primaries will reveal the differences in her and her opponents and she will explain her decisions well to the satisfaction of all. It's possible that Obama will campaign for her and he could explain her to many.
I admit, I was furious with her in the debates in 2008, before I even looked at Obama. It was his words and behavior at that time which convinced me he was of the type I was, an activist who knew some things can be negotiated to save lives, some things are possible amd some are not and that lives depend on even tiny victories.
And Obama is moving to get going to war as an option off the table. She won't be able even if she wanted (and I'm not saying she would, although she is more hawkish than I prefer), to start a war with what he will leave as his legacy, an American public who has lost its belief that war is the answer to anything. And I believe she was caught up in a certain time frame, which no longer exists.
So on that, I don't feel there is any danger from what the OP is about. She'll have to prove her bonafides during the primary. I'm looking forward to seeing it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
