Gray Flannel Dwarf


Idle speculation

So, they’ve announced keynote themes for the convention days.

  • Wednesday, the day the Veep candidate speaks, will have a partial focus on veterans’ issues
  • The theme is entitled “Securing America’s Future”
  • An interesting graphic (and for that matter, domain name), over at an established PAC.

Tags: , , , — cswiii @ 2:46 pm


Leading is Fundamental!

Insomuch as one might be able to swallow something published by Mother Jones w/o a little bit of salt, here’s an interesting article on Hillary Clinton’s evangelical connections.

They do turn an interesting angle on Tillich and Niebuhr, in this one. Kind of curious, over all.

Tags: , , , , — cswiii @ 12:37 am


Open note to the DNC

Dear Dr. Howard Dean, et al
During these last miserable six+ years, I have changed quite a bit. After years of staunch, “independence”, expressing dissatisfaction with both parties, I was fed up with the current POTUS. I supported Wes Clark early on, and after the primaries were over, I winced slightly and voted for Kerry in 2004, the first time I voted for a major party in a Presidential election, and one of only a very small handful of votes I’d ever made in state or federal elections where I did such.

The results in 2004 were less than admirable, but I continued to support the Democrats. In September of 2005, I officially registered as a Democrat. I also began contributing monthly via the Democracy Bonds programme in order to help the Democrats make gains.

This bond is kind of what’s on my mind right now.

You see, I like to invest, on the side, and like most investors, I will invest in companies which I feel will bring good results. Likewise, when I question a business strategy, I will be more hesitant, and may very well sell.

Certainly, the Democrats made great strides in 2006, and I feel the accomplishments were numerous and great. I’m hoping we continue to see great things happen in the name of progress… So let it be known that if Hillary Clinton ends up getting the nod from Democratic delegates around this country for a 2008 run, please be well-advised that you’ll see my support dry up. Just as I don’t invest in floundering companies, nor will I invest in a political organisation which nominates unelectable candidates. The Democrats have been out of the White House for eight years by the time the next inauguration rolls around, and I certainly don’t want to see another four.

This is not an issue of “fair weather fan” syndrome.  Rather, it’s more like stark reality. That you’re hearing this from me, a registered Democrat, is probably all the more indicative of what the many unaffiliated, independents who are still out there, whose votes will probably be of greater importance this year than any election in recent history, are thinking. Ms. Clinton may be popular amongst a large plurality of the party, but any attempt to convince those beyond party lines is little more than a fool’s errand.

Yes, the primary season is democratic, too. Emboldened Democrats will vote for the candidate they feel should represent the party — and country — in 2008, and I guess, in the end, you haven’t any control over that. Democracy is terrific in that sense.

Nonetheless, keep in mind that I’m not the only one out here thinking thoughts such as these. It might behoove the Democratic party to take that into consideration as things ramp up heading towards 2008. This is not a matter of petty special interests groups or necessarily personal bias. Rather, it’s about common sense. It’s been a drought the past two elections… and Hillary Rodham Clinton is not the hard rain that these parched crops are looking for. Any nomination of Hillary Clinton would be construed by me, and many others, as more irrational idealism that, quite frankly, neither this party nor this country can ill afford.