Emotional Dishonesty & Political Courage

I knew I would have to blog about this at some point after I began reading several comments from Clinton "supporters" who ardently exclaimed they would be voting for John McCain in November if Hillary was not the Democratic party nominee. After reading hundreds of comments and listening to quite a bit of audio commentary from these folks, they seem to fall into one of two camps.

The first camp are those people, mostly older women, who are truly devastated at the prospects of her getting so close to come up just short of the nomination. These women appear to be allowing their strong emotions to cloud their better political judgment. There was a time where I was a fan of John McCain, back in 2000 he seemed to be much less ideological and more inclined to listen to people who disagreed with him. How someone can go from debating about leaving the Republican party after Bush smeared him mercilessly (illegitimate black baby anyone?), to hugging Bush and courting the neocon loons on the right, is utterly inconceivable to me. That is not political courage, that is political expediency. By embracing McCain over Obama, this group is embracing the policies of the past 8 years over the change that both Obama and Clinton have sought.

The second group that is threatening to bolt to McCain this fall are the, how can I put this nicely, culturally insensitive. The less than politically correct crowd might even call them racists or bigots. Some of these folks have gone so far as to say out loud during interviews that they will not vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, or even because of his name. We can talk all we want about how far we have come as a nation in terms of racial healing and justice, but the exit polls from West Virginia and Kentucky (in particular) are honestly very sad and reflect the national tone from pre Civil Rights days.

I submit for your review two pieces of evidence. The first, to try and convince the first group to vote with their political brain and not their emotional hearts, I give you the website:

http://www.progressivepunch.com

This site ranks each Senate member on their Progressive thinking based on their actual voting record. How'd they do? Clinton scored a 91.11% progressive score, and ranked 20th out of 100 Senators. Obama scored a 88.54% and ranked 25th out of 100 Senators. John McCain? How about a 13.9% and a dismal ranking of 60th out of 100. Who shares your views? Also, these people who tend to say that Hillary got treated poorly by Obama or the DNC, have been asked repeatedly to show one example of such sexist behavior and to date I have seen none.

My second piece of evidence, aimed at the second group I discussed, is Ms. Harriet Christian. This older New York woman should be the next YouTube sensation (go ahead and search for her name on You Tube). She was the lady in the clip at the DNC rules and bylaws meeting from last Saturday stating the party is giving the nomination to a "inadequate black male." Her, Gerry Ferraro, and others like them are truly a waste of media coverage. To be honest, I would be very happy to NOT have these people's vote in November. Their way of thinking (pre Civil Rights) is the epitome of political past, which McCain represents.

Onward to the general, as we take victory tonight, let us celebrate a hard fought primary win. Tomorrow is a new fight, and for the good of the United States, indeed the world, it is a fight we must win.