Thursday, April 26, 2007

1st Democratic Debate or let's bash Bush on MSNBC cos we have no answers

So, the Dems had their first debate, tonight, and I was totally underwhelmed. Not one candidate I could like, let alone trust.

LIST OF CANDIDATES: (not in order of any preference, obviously)

Sen. Hillary Clinton, NY
Sen. Barack Obama, IL
Fmr. Sen. John Edwards, NC
Sen. Joe Biden, DE
Gov. Bill Richardson, NM
Fmr. Sen. Robert Mike Gravel, Alaska
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, OH
Sen. Chris Dodd, CT

The candidates, a smorgasbord of the loony left, took full advantage (any chance they had) of bashing Bush and the current administration, from the war in Iraq to domestic policy. In fact, they spent more time censuring GW and his policies, than responding to the various questions asked, and most found ways to avoid answering questions directly, particularly those "let's make 'em squirm" assortment of questions. Then again, politicians are masters at evasion, so what else did we expect?!

Not surprisingly, all of them said they would bring the troops home immediately if they were elected President. But, the overt need to discuss the issue, even when asked unrelated questions, just demonstrates how politically expedient it is to be 'anti-war', at this stage in the game. Okay, we get that you all want 'out' of this war because you think that's what the American people want, and you'll say anything to win. We get that. But do you have to be so obvious about it?

The front-runners (or the ones with the largest war chests): La Hillary 'I am woman hear me roar!' Clinton and Barry, I mean Barack 'who am I?' Obama were the most eloquent, but as trustworthy as an ex-con in Tiffany's. Hillary kept her composure, for the most part, standing there in her pant suit trying to look every bit as butch as the rest of 'em, and succeeding quite nicely. There's a harshness to her demeanour that never disappears, which is not a good thing. They both waffled on many of the issues, in a concerted effort to appeal to everyone. Also not a good thing. As for our southern pretty boy, Edwards, there's something too slick and disingenuous about him. He tried his damnedest to appeal to the middle class working shlub (in spite of his $400.00 haircuts, and multi-million dollar mansion) by trying to convince us of his working class roots, with a story about a humiliating experience, as a kid, when his family had to leave a restaurant because his Dad couldn't afford the prices. I didn't buy it.

As for the others, they're all non-contenders, in my humble opinion. Non-descript Biden and Dodd, and blustery Richardson were all pretty much unmemorable, but who on earth is Mike Gravel, and how the heck did he ever get elected Senator???? I thought Dennis Kucinich was nuts but Gravel is wacko. (They both get added to my Idiots Hall of Shame, alongside Jimmy Carter.) Kucinich babbled on about how there is no global war on terror, it simply "doesn't exist", and was the only one who raised his hand when asked if anyone thought Cheney should be impeached. But Gravel takes the crown for being the King of the Loons, he believes we have no enemies. I have no idea what planet he came from. The poor fool needs to go back and stick his head in the sand. Or snow. Or whatever. (I don't think there's sand in Alaska.) Thankfully, he wasn't asked many questions, much to his chagrin, but from the few he was asked: Gravel is a loose canon, that I would fear having as President. (Though there are some fellow wackos who loved Kucinich and Gravel on the MSNBC message boards.)

Of all the candidates, Kucinich and Gravel were the most vocal about their rabidly anti-Iraq War stance, with Gravel emphatically stating, at one point, that "This war was lost the day that George Bush invaded Iraq on a fraudulent basis!" Kucinich concurred, claiming the war was based on lies. There might have been others who mentioned that, as well, I don't recall, but how many times do we have to listen to that crap? I am so totally sick of that argument. Please, something new!

Next week we have the Republican debate. It will be interesting to see what they have to say.

In the meantime, I draw comfort from the fact that no running senator has ever won the presidency, since Kennedy in 1960, and I'm praying it remains that way!


danny wright said...

With these guys in office, our enemies can truly say: With America as an enemy, who needs friends?

Incognito said...

Yup, Danny, absolutely right. Let's make sure none of them get the Presidency.

MUD said...

I am standing at my window looking out to see if either party can find someone worth voting for. We need someone who can talk to the big uninformed mass in the middle and bring them together. I am convinced that 10% at both ends don't want to listen just shout at the rest of us. There just has to be a trustworthy smart guy out there that can do the job well. I'm waiting. MUD

Blazing Cat Fur said...

I would vote for Fred if I was a US citizen.

Incognito said...

I know what you mean, MUD. All I know is that the Dems don't have anyone, at this point worthy of voting for. And I have to do some more research with the Repubs. The problem will be trying to get that middle to come together, because we are in deep trouble if any of the current Dems win.

And Fred looks interesting BCF. Need to do some more reading up on him. But the important thing is to find someone who can beat Obama or Clinton. And Fred hasn't announced he's in the running, yet. Or has he?

Incognito said...

And if Clinton wins, I'm moving to Canada!

Billy T. Johnson said...

The left may be all that you say that they are, however, in any form of democratic government, liberals temper conservatives and vice-versa.

Incognito said...

Very true, Billy, otherwise we would have a dictatorship.