Sunday, December 2, 2007

Bad Knitting Karma and Election Cawfee Tawlk

One step forward, one step backward. That pretty accurately describes the progress of late on Autumn Rose. I got the neckline steek started and joined the sleeves to the body. However, I've just kept making stupid mistakes on a couple of recent rows, requiring tinking and reknitting more than once. What's more, I've very nearly run out of the Old Gold and Sunrise colors, and I still have an entire motif using those colors left. I ordered some more from Nestucca Bay yarns, from whom I bought the kit originally, and they were so very nice about sending out another skein of each. I'm at the beginning of the next band of the circular motif, so I can at least work on that until the new yarn arrives. I don't know why I've run out. I even used the scraps from my swatch early on, because I was afraid I would run out of just these colors.

I have no picture of my current progress, because the cat is sitting on it right now.

And yes, I do think about things other than knitting.

Take the US presidential election for example. I'm completely unsure of who I would want to vote for at this point. Not a Republican, that's for sure. Among the Democratic candidates are a lot of worthy options. None are perfect, but several are too close to call for me. I'm not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton. I find her too conservative. I also believe that she might be unelectable. I know she goes to great pains to convince us that she's the only Democratic candidate who is electable, but I disagree. I remember all too well the completely viscious and visceral hatred she inspired in people while her husband was President. There was a certain faction who thought she was the most evil person who walked the earth. Those people have not disappeared. I also believe that she shares some of Shrub's less stellar qualities -- defensiveness and an unwillingness to admit when she's wrong. A lot of people complain that she "voted for the Iraq war" and that she hasn't fully recanted that vote. That's a completely bullshit argument. The vote that people are now calling the vote "for going to war in Iraq" as if Congress was rubberstamping whatever Shrub wanted to do was NOT a vote for immediate armed action in Iraq. It was a preemptive vote to give Shrub the power to go to war should the UN inspections process and attempts at diplomatic solutions fail. At that time, UN inspections were continuing, but inspectors were already saying that there didn't seem to be any weapons of mass destruction. Congress didn't know that Shrub was going to manipulate intelligence and make Colin Powell fall on his sword in an attempt to give credibility to his lies, thus forcing war. Moreover, Congress was seeing the manipulated (fabricated?) intelligence, and had no clear reason to doubt its veracity at that time. We really need to remember what kind of fear and paranoia the nation was working under at that time, mainly because the Administration was peddling it hard. There was a strong current of "if you're not with us, you're aiding and abetting the terrorists." Therefore, I don't think that every member of Congress who voted for that resolution should be tarred and feathered with it now.

Barack Obama, to me, seems a bit green to be running for President right now. He doesn't have a whole lot of experience to draw on that makes me believe he'll be the right man to be President. He does, however, make a strong argument that he can be more of a unifier as President than Hillary can. This is not an insignificant argument as far as I'm concerned. We have been subject to such bitter partisanship for the last 15 years. It has really hurt our ability to have rational discussions about appropriate policy decisions that could help the country. That level of bitter partisanship exists not just on a governmental level, but a societal level as well. Republicans decided that demonizing Democrats and turning the word "liberal" into a virtual curse word was the best way to gain power. I am just as guilty of being vehement and extreme in my hatred of some Republicans. I do think that Obama can be a President that both sides will be willing to work with. He does seem to be able to transcend some of the bitter partisanship in the current climate.

I was originally quite interested in the possibility of a Bill Richardson campaign. Now HE has a lot of relevant experience. He also seems thoughtful, smart, and reasonable. Which probably makes him unelectable :) I was disappointed in his response to a debate question on gay marriage, however. He did try to backpedal it later, but the impression hasn't gone away. I was hoping for more visibility and passion from him. I haven't seen him take charge of any of the debates or any of the issues. In order to be elected, he's going to have to break out and make people pay attention to him.

On a gut level, I don't like John Edwards. Just don't like him.

So there's my dilemma. Unfortunately, it won't be up to me who ends up heading the Democratic ticket.

My biggest fear? The accelerated primary season means that the nominees will get chosen so early that the candidates from both parties will have so much time to tear each other apart in the run-up to the general election that everyone will be so disgusted with them that they won't want to vote for either.

So far I know my husband is reading. If anyone else is, please drop a line and say hi!


Scott T. said...

husband? Did he see when I propositioned you earlier? I'm really physically fit, particularly for a financially comfortable 41 year old man, but, you know, I kind of lack any upper body muscle, so I hope your husband isn't too big.

Yeah, I hate them all. I don't know if I'm capable of liking anyone that would want to be president. To want the job means, by definition, the individual is so deeply caught up in themselves that they are twisted. Let's just say that I've had close up observation in the past 6 months of someone who is deep in the DC power politics game and it's disgusting and the people involved are disgusting people.

And really, morman issues aside, we cannot have a president named "Mitt"

Anonymous said...

agreed. they are all frightening. I tend to be more conservative than it appears you are, and think that Richardson would be viable if he would just get some charisma. Is it awful that I am actually considering dropping cable so I don't have to endure political ads for the next year?

Loren T said...

I hear ya, anonymous. I would LOVE some honest political discourse instead of sound bites, attack ads, and debate one-liners. This is where I think someone like Richardson would shine. Unfortunately, it's not going to happen :(