Who Gave This Woman a Soapbox?
I have to say, this is one of the most vapid posts
in a long history of vaporous posts at the HuffnPuff. Compared to Jane Smiley, Jim Lampley seems positively erudite and sophisticated. Writing on the evils of Hillary:
Clinton, of course, is not Cheney. Dick Cheney is the mad master of corruption, a person who literally doesn't know what integrity is. But Hillary is too smart not to know, and she has made up her mind to shelve her integrity for the sake of ambition. And let me be clear what I mean by corruption -- I have no idea what her financial gains have been over the years, and I don't care. What I mean by corruption is any and all support of the criminal policies of the Republicans while calling herself a Democrat, in order to gain power.
Typical airheaded liberal who thinks that Democrats should disagree with anything the Republicans come up with. But she's got a slot at the HuffnPuff, and it's not hard to gather that she pays some attention to politics. But get this:
Obama is not a known quantity. I have seen him one time and listened to one speech, and I was reasonably impressed by that speech. But Hillary Clinton is a known quantity. If you like the world that the Bushes and Clintons have made in the last twenty years, then you should by all means vote for her. But as of this week, I don't see her as the person I want answering the red phone.
She's listened to one speech? Sheesh, I'm in the "no way I'd vote for Obama camp," and I've listened to a half-dozen speeches of his and the audiobook of The Audacity of Hope. Maybe she's in the fruitcake 5% that is considering voting for Nader, but otherwise it seems insane that she's posting her thoughts on a major liberal blog with that ridiculously slender amount of attention paid to a major candidate.