Harold Ford has been all over the news shows - especially this past weekend - selling his "let's win the White House by out-Republicaning the Republicans" plan for the Democrats. (I have my own theories about the entrenched party elite and why he was chosen to chair the DLC, which is for another post.) This guy represents the kind of politics that makes my skin crawl - winning office is more important than any issue, any legislation, any cause, any ideal because we'll take care of that after we win; but then they never do. Here's a taste of his strategy:

"You have to understand people like George Bush. He's a nice guy. We need to learn from him. Remember what Bill Clinton did: He figured out what Republicans were doing well, and instead of complaining about it, he figured out a way to do it better."

Ummm.... yeah. In the meantime, this nice guy and his cronies have stripped away our constitutional rights of habeas corpus, lied and lied and lied and lied and then bragged about it, disgraced the office of the president, dismantled the entire foundation of the judicial branch and introduced new ways of spying on American citizens in violation of our civil rights.

All of these things are part of the reason that I just can't throw my support behind HRC. She has not demonstrated a willingness to first do what is right and think about the political consequences later. I may be idealistic, but I am not naive. I know you have to play the game to even have a chance at a position of power and influence. But she goes above and beyond. Obama may play the game, but he knows the point at which you cross into the valley of the shadow of compromise and betrayal.

HRC is playing Rove's game of slinging personal and over-simplified attacks at her opponent (never mind that he is also a fellow party member). Obama is not naive and inexperienced in either politics or policy. HRC's husband suffered similar accusations throughout his campaign, having only served as the governor of one of the poorest, most "backwater" states in the country. More significantly, HRC has repeatedly attacked Obama for his "naive" foreign policy positions. Perhaps she's unfamiliar with this little piece of historical literature from another young, charming and inexperienced junior senator:

"Civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate."

I'm sick of Democrats who are not brave enough to be liberals. I want a woman taking that presidential oath of office as much as the next feminist and it is really pissing me off that here we are, so close we can taste it, but I don't want to vote for her. What the hell is the point of voting for a woman who won't represent feminist or even progressive values?