to re-elect or not to re-elect

so, usually i have very little trouble deciding who to vote for. yet, this year i am faced with a real dilemma: whether or not to support hillary clinton’s re-election campaign for u.s. senate. hillary clinton, of course, is up for re-election this november as a senator from new york. and i am rather displeased with her (here are some of the reasons). i am a very loyal democrat, of course, and i would never betray the party, especially not at such a vital time such as this. but, her dlc shenanigans and lovefests with rupert murdoch, her endorsement of flag-burning amendments and her denunciations of grand theft auto, her support for the war in iraq... it is all shameless pandering and trying to reach across party lines and pander to her enemies. but guess what? most people do not like hillary clinton, especially not right-wingers. so why has she been trying so hard to reach out to them? people in new york state like her a lot, of course; she will easily get re-elected here if she is the democratic nominee, which looks likely. however, i simply do not agree with her power-hungry ways and her lack of any real principles. i mean, maybe she really does believe in the policies she supports... but why on earth is she cultivating a relationship with rupert murdoch? that is like selling your soul to the devil, except even worse. at this point, after much thought, i have decided i simply can’t support her in the democratic primary, although of course she would be better than a republican. yet, if her senate victory is by a slimmer margin, that might help the democrats choose a better candidate for president in 2008. so if hillary clinton is the democratic nominee, i hope she wins by a margin of victory of about 1%. as for who i want to win? jonathan tasini. he is the only progressive candidate who is running for senate in the democratic primary. he is awesome! i can feel much better about voting for him, than about voting for ms. clinton, who is probably going to just be a part-time senator, have a lousy voting record, and then ditch the senate entirely after another 2 years. i would definitely vote for hillary if she were willing to promise that she is not running for president in 2008. that would be a good deal. then the dems can get a real candidate like russ feingold, and if we somehow lose in ’08, her senate term ends in 2012, which is another presidential election year. so, for now, i am supporting jonathan tasini, and hoping to see less of hillary clinton. but, come november, i will vote straight party-line democrat, no matter who the candidates are. because if we don’t vote out the republican congress, the lobbyists win. and i am certainly not anti-woman; that has nothing to do with my opposition to hillary clinton. i am quite a fan of nancy pelosi and i look forward to her being speaker of the house of representatives, and maybe someday she could be president. stranger things have happened. of course, nancy pelosi might take some flak for representing san francisco, but who needs the homophobic vote? the democrats aren’t going to get the homophobic vote anyway, and we should stand up for what is right, not for what is wrong. of course racists and homophobes and bigots vote republican, because it is the democrats who always oppose them; we should never compromise our values, because then we would be no better than republicans. and as an ardent supporter of free speech who hates all forms of censorship, i vehemently oppose hillary clinton’s efforts to ban flag burning and the game grand theft auto. people should be free to play whatever video games they want. period. and we should be able to burn any flag we want, whether it is an american flag, a venezuelan flag, a british flag, an iraqi flag, or a united nations flag... everybody should be able to think of at least one place they don’t like, that they might want to burn a flag of. for me, i think i would choose to burn a chinese flag. goddamn chinese! the people’s republic of china really pisses me off. check out the epoch times for a fair and balanced view of that country. taiwan, on the other hand, is ok... i got no problem with them, in fact i think taiwan is a pretty awesome country. well, technically, it isn’t officially a country... but that is because of the goddamn chinese bastards! hey china guess what? stop massacring your own people, you sick fucks! executions should be limited to people who committed murder, and don’t harvest people’s internal organs while they are still alive! weirdos. anyway, what the hell is up with russia? dick cheney criticized them, and then vladimir putin criticized the united states, and now u.s.-russian relations are at the lowest point since ronald reagan signed legislation banning russia forever. you know what, dick cheney? you need to shut the fuck up, that’s what you need to do. russia is a democracy now and we need them as an ally so we can put pressure on iran and help keep them from getting nukes. good job, asshole. and you know russia has, like, more natural resources than anyone? good luck trying to get access to any of those. and what is up with normalizing relations with libya and taking them off the state sponsors of terror list, while we ban arms sales to venezuela and put them on a list of countries that are sort of kinda state sponsors of terror but not really? since when is muammar qaddhafi our friend despite being an evil dictator, and how come the democratically elected president of venezuela, hugo chavez, has to be our enemy? hint hint: hugo chavez has oil but he is a leftist and he won’t respect our authoritah. why not be nice to him for a change? i mean, he is a pretty awesome dude, in case you saw that documentary about him, the revolution will not be televised. if we stopped being so evil, he might be nicer to us. and that starts by electing a congress which is less evil, this november. you know what to do. vote for that party that jack abramoff wasn’t in, the one that actually sometimes tries to help out regular people instead of just the elites who don’t need the help.