Iraq? What Iraq?

Dem voters no longer fight battle of Iraq

As predicted, the dems are no longer worried about Iraq. We should hardly be surprised since the front-runner, Clinton, is just a culpable as any neo-con for this tragedy that has no end in sight. However, since it will be more of a burden to Clinton than to any of her Republican challengers, the issue has gone away. Or at least it has gone away from the Iowa campaign and among top democratic insiders. They know the issue will bite them in the fall of 2008 if Hillary is their candidate.

The question though is why Obama is pursuing the strategy he is pursuing. His advocating an invasion of Pakistan to show that he is tough on...well tough enough to declare war for no reason...seems to be for the sake of looking like he is not afraid to declare war or use force...however poorly formulated the policy or tragic the results. It shows he is looking toward the fall of 2008 and that this is not just a test run. That may be why he is not exploiting the one issue that would allow him to trounce Hillary among the anti-war left. But perhaps he already has these votes and doesn't need to remind voters of the fact.

Hillary has been suffering in the polls lately, but her numbers are still strong. If the majority of democratic voters had any integrity (you remember, the ones opposed to the war and who wanted to impeach Bush 15 minutes after he took office) they would be savaging Hillary for her vote and abandoning her in droves. But just like politics in the GOP, personality trumps issues and principles. Granted, every candidate makes sure to massage the voter bases soft spots on the way to making the kill, but few, if any, have actually results to show. Most do the exact opposite of what they say because it has helped to ensure their re-election. Democrats move the right, Republicans to the left. The side that wins usually gets the opposite of what they were promised.

This is why I am almost tempted to vote for Hillary. I have agreed with almost nothing she has said on the campaign trail. On the other hand, I know in my heart that her sole goal in life is power through becoming president. That means that she will say anything to get elected and by saying anything we mean no-holes-barred "lying". So if someone says the opposite of what you agree with constantly and you know they are in all likelihood either lying about their beliefs or lying about what they are going to do, then chances are they will be almost exactly what you want.

In my own opinion, Hillary's personal goal for power trumps whatever her beliefs may be and she will sell out her party's base just as quickly as the democratic Congress has done in this past session. The same mentality existed with Nixon. This is probably why lawyers should be banned from the presidency.