I wrote about this a few days ago here. Watch this little video where the REAL “change” candidate explains what REAL change is and why you won’t get it from the Big 3 (much less the ReTHUGlicans).
You gotta ask yourself exactly what change it is you are looking for in America? Do you want to flirt with the change edges (which is what Obama might do)? Do you want to fight against Big Money (something Edwards might do)? Do you want to keep things basically the same as Herr’s Bush’s America (something Hillary will likely do)? Or do you REALLY want America to change into what Dennis describes?
If Dennis’ America is your dream, then wtf are you doing supporting these other ying-yangs?
She is the worst choice America has on the Democratic side. This woman is the same old shit we have had for decades. Same old coffers. Same old Empire building horseshit.
I haven’t endorsed Mike Gravel, altho he has always been my second choice (simply due to his record and the fact the he and Dennis are the only two who aren’t part of the Big Money Horseshit). I would vote for Obama (preferably Edwards) if Dennis nor Mike get the nod (sure don’t look like it). But this is about what is best for America, even though America is too farking stupid to understand what is best (Turn OFF that stinking TV for a change).
And to bring the point home regarding Hillary’s coffers and where her obligations will lie, I will let Big Business express their thoughts on the subject from this excerpt from a recent Guardian article warning what an Edwards presidency would do to business and their special interests (sidelining that they have Hillary right where they want her):
Asked which candidate their clients most support, corporate lobbyists were unsure. Clinton has cautious backing within the corporate jet set, as do Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain and former Republican Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, they said.
These candidates represent stability to executives who have much to lose if November’s election brings about the sweeping change some candidates are promising.
Obama and Huckabee register largely as unknown quantities among business owners, both large and small, say lobbyists.
“My sense is that Obama would govern as a reasonably pragmatic Democrat … I think Hillary is approachable. She knows where a lot of her funding has come from, to be blunt,” said Greg Valliere, chief political strategist at Stanford Group Co., a market and policy analysis group.
But Edwards, Valliere said, is seen as “an anti-business populist” and “a trade protectionist who is quite unabashed about raising taxes.”
“I think his regulatory policies, as well as his tax policies, would be viewed as a threat to business,” he said.
“The next scariest for business would be Huckabee because of his rhetoric and because he’s an unknown.” (Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh; editing by John Wallace)
buelahman
lrose48
