This article completely depresses me. It's about the impending clock-cleaning Obama is about to get in WVa and Kentucky. It's not the loss in votes; that's expected. But it's the sentiments behind the votes. Those sentiments being prejudice and ignorance.
Now I know I'm on shaky "elite" ground in saying this, but hear me out. When you have people saying that they'd vote for EITHER Hillary Clinton OR John McCain, what you have are blocs of people voting on something other than issues. I mean, seriously. Pick an issue, any issue (except the gas tax holiday, ha ha), decide how you feel about it, then compare and contrast the views and proposals of HRC and JMcC. Economy? War? Education? Taxes? Enviroment? Choice? Civil Unions? Spending? Pick any damn issue and tell me there isn't worlds of daylight between Clinton and McCain on every single one. So how does a anyone credibly say they would vote for one or the other if they're actually voting for President based on something?
I mean, here's a quote: "Like most people in Mingo County, West Virginia, Leonard Simpson is a lifelong Democrat. But given a choice between Barack Obama and John McCain in November, the 67-year-old retired coalminer would vote Republican. “I heard that Obama is a Muslim and his wife’s an atheist,” said Mr Simpson." So there you have it. "I heard." Did he also hear that McCain called his wife the C word? That Clinton made up a story about sniper fire? I'm sure Mr. Simpson has "heard" lots of stuff about the candidates. Curious that he seems concerned only with the ones about Obama. But not concerned enough, apparently, to see if what he "heard" is true. But I guess if someone is giving you a reason to feel okay about voting your prejudices, you don't argue, right? It's not because he's black; it's because, you know, I heard he's a muslim and his wife's an atheist.
Even more depressing is hearing this from someone who is all of 24 years old: "Josh Fry, a 24-year-old ambulance driver from Williamson, insisted he was not racist but said he would feel more comfortable with Mr McCain, the 71-year-old Vietnam war hero, in the White House. “I want someone who is a full-blooded American as president,” he said. One wonders if Mr. Fry could tell us what his definition of "full-blooded American" might be. But he need not. Simply knowing that he'd be "more comfortable" with McCain speaks volumes.
More depressing than hearing these sentiments from people who belong to my political party is the fact that Bill Clinton is fomenting it in his good ole' boy tour of rural America: Clinton "told them his wife represented “people like you, in places like this”, and urged voters to turn out in record numbers on Tuesday to send a message to the “higher-type people” who were trying to force her out of the race." And this, earlier, fomenting the class divisions in his very own party: "Hillary is in this race because of people like you and places like this and no matter what they say," Clinton said. "And no matter how much fun they make of your support of her and the fact that working people all over America have stuck with her, she thinks you're as smart as they are. She thinks you've got as much right to have your say as anybody else. And, you know, they make a lot of fun of me because I like to campaign in places like this, they say I have been exiled to rural America, as if that was a problem. I don't know about you, but I'd rather be here than listening to that stuff I have to hear on television, I'd rather be with you. There is a simple reason: You need a president a lot more than those people telling you not to vote for her."
Here's my point: You'd hope that people would vote for President based on issues of concern to their families and communities. At the same time, every American is entitled to vote based on any damn thing they want. It's not ideal, but it's something they're entitled to do. Agreed. All I'm asking is whether they ought not to be entitled to being applauded for it by a former President.