Kucinich is interesting, and he's much more specific than Edwards, but my own feeling is that he's not really presidential. Edwards, I just don't know what he's about. What bothers me about vague anti-corporate rhetoric is that it means nothing. Communism is anti-corporate, too, but I don't want any part of that. And when nearly all of us work for corporations large and small -- your local newspaper stand, restaurant and independent clothing store are probably corporations -- and our entire economy is founded on the flexibility that corporations provide for doing business, just sounding off about the corporate boogie man isn't going to get us anywhere. What is it about corporations, exactly, that we need to address? Which corporations? How big, how small? How foreign? There definitely are problems, especially in how our political system is corrupted, but blaming "corporations" is like blaming telephones for obscene phone calls.
That's why a more intellectual, more sober approach is what appeals to me. Perhaps appeals to many. We've done the rabid ideologue bit with Bush, and look where it got us? His blinders and stupidity have done more harm than any other president in history, imho. But just pushing back with more ideological stridency of rhetoric that does nothing to draw in all the people out there that might be allies in this is not going to achieve anything, or at least not much of anything.
I'm not talking about appealing to the non-"Democrat" politicians, but the people -- the same people who are talking about "Sicko" -- the same people who are disgusted by what's been happening but just never happened to be raised to vote Democratic -- that is the revolution needed, imho. We the People can do a lot, but not if we continue to let ourselves be divided by a political system that thrives on paralyzing us over petty conflict. The real issues are divisive enough already.
Kucinich is interesting, and he's much more specific than Edwards, but my own feeling is that he's not really presidential. Edwards, I just don't know what he's about. What bothers me about vague anti-corporate rhetoric is that it means nothing. Communism is anti-corporate, too, but I don't want any part of that. And when nearly all of us work for corporations large and small -- your local newspaper stand, restaurant and independent clothing store are probably corporations -- and our entire economy is founded on the flexibility that corporations provide for doing business, just sounding off about the corporate boogie man isn't going to get us anywhere. What is it about corporations, exactly, that we need to address? Which corporations? How big, how small? How foreign? There definitely are problems, especially in how our political system is corrupted, but blaming "corporations" is like blaming telephones for obscene phone calls.
That's why a more intellectual, more sober approach is what appeals to me. Perhaps appeals to many. We've done the rabid ideologue bit with Bush, and look where it got us? His blinders and stupidity have done more harm than any other president in history, imho. But just pushing back with more ideological stridency of rhetoric that does nothing to draw in all the people out there that might be allies in this is not going to achieve anything, or at least not much of anything.
I'm not talking about appealing to the non-"Democrat" politicians, but the people -- the same people who are talking about "Sicko" -- the same people who are disgusted by what's been happening but just never happened to be raised to vote Democratic -- that is the revolution needed, imho. We the People can do a lot, but not if we continue to let ourselves be divided by a political system that thrives on paralyzing us over petty conflict. The real issues are divisive enough already.