But the experts agree!

Another day goes by, and Clinton still has nothing to say in response to Obama's amazing speech or the whole Geraldine Ferraro debacle. You know, I've been accused of being a "character voter" who only supports Obama because I have some how fallen pray to the cult of personality that is building around him, which I find frankly insulting because I am one of the only people I know who bothered to watch the debates in full (and as though my reasons for voting for Obama are somehow separate from "the issues.") It's apparently the only recourse that Clinton supporters have, to belittle Obama backers because they perceive his following to be some kind of parade of glassy-eyed hero worshippers under the spell of the media that is so unfair to Clinton.

First of all, I want to say that the difference in the way these two have been campaigning is not just the nature of politics--it is a meaningful difference that truly truly speaks to the contrast between these two candidates. Hillary Clinton has consistently run a campaign that looks like something Karl Rove would come up with. She has insinuated that Obama might be a Muslim by not giving a simple answer of "no" when asked if she thought he was. Instead, she said she didn't think so "as far as I know." She insinuated that we shouldn't trust our precious children to the protection of a bogeyman in the middle of the night, because the phone might ring and the black man might not know what to do. She allowed Geraldine Ferraro to spew her vitriolic bile and then gleefully pretended that Ferraro's words didn't constitute a view held by the Clinton campaign, yet not distancing herself from it far enough by both rejecting and denouncing Ferraro's words. Now she wants to change the rules in the middle of the game and seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan and has called Obama "un-American" for his position that the original decision of the DNC should be honored.

A few weeks ago on SNL Tina Fey got on her soapbox and essentially told us that we needed a woman in the White House because after 230 years, it was time. I am sick of this argument. To me, it is anti-feminist to support a candidate just because she is a woman--as though we couldn't be trusted to make the decision for ourselves. I reserve the right to vote for whomever I chose, and I am grateful and indebted to the generations of women before me who fought tirelessly to guarantee me that right. But I don't think women chained themselves outside the White House gate during the Wilson administration so that I would be guilt-tripped into voting for a female candidate just because she has been handpicked by some psuedo-feminist coalition. I wouldn't vote for Ann Coulter or Condoleeza Rice just because they are women. And no, I'm not voting against Hillary because she's "a bitch." I'm voting for Obama because he's the best candidate. He opposed the war even when it wasn't politically expedient, when he had everything on the line in his career because he was running for Senate. Clinton demonstrated her judgement and experience when she wrote George Bush a blank fucking check for this war. She demonstrated her judgement and experience when she voted against a cluster-bomb ban, (which Obama supported.) She has demonstrated an extremely twisted sense of judgement in running a ruthless and manipulative campaign that has consistently smeared Obama out of nothing more than a desire to win. For Chrissakes, they are both Democrats but from the way she's done things you would think Rove was her puppetmaster. The Republicans will be a piece of cake to deal with after we're done with her.

David asked me recently if I feel disappointed that the first female candidate to make it this far has turned out to be such a bitter, divisive figure. My answer is that I don't feel that she represents me as a woman. Early in her candidacy I felt torn between a desire to support the female empowerment and a deep sense of mistrust. I even thought I would vote for her. But the solution to this dilemma has become clearer by the day. I don't feel disappointed by her--she's just another crooked, conniving, scheming, rotten politician that Washington spit out of its ugly machine. Instead, I feel disappointed in her supporters for putting her in this position of power. Many of those who I've talked to tend to just regurgitate the line about her experience, without ever having watched a single debate, read any of the speeches, listened to any of the townhall meetings, or generally done anything besides casually glancing at the newspaper. If you are going to cast your vote, pay attention to who you're voting for. It's really the least you can do. People in other countries (see Kenya, Pakistan) are fighting and dying today for a chance to make a meaningful change through their votes. So pay attention, god dammit. And stop parroting the campaign rhetoric so that we can have an honest debate about the relative merits of these two candidates instead of just repeating a list of talking points.