Disingenuous

Well.... before you throw mud on someone, you want to make sure that you don't have mud on yourself.

"...and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor [Tony] Rezco in a slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago." That is what Hillary Clinton said to Barack Obama in the last debate. I was totally turned off. Is anyone else? Hey, if we want McCain to be our next President, this is a good start.

But I understand that this is just politics as usual. This is what we've come to. It's not as if our current President has set the bar very high. But, I'd like to think that the Democrats could at least be a bit better than this.

However, with a few quick keystrokes on the Internet, what do I turn up? You got it... a photo of Tony Rezco with Hillary and Bill Clinton. Hillary explains this away saying, "I've probably taken hundreds of thousands of pictures. I don't have a 17-year relationship with him."

An opinion piece put it this way, "Frankly, Clinton's line doesn't cut it. When you attack your opponent for his ties to a "slum landlord," it is always a good idea to make sure you didn't pose for grips-and-grins with, er, well, a "slum landlord. Obama's still got some explaining to do. But so does Clinton."

Perhaps Hillary should explain, but she won't. The damage to Obama has been done. She is off campaigning in New Jersey, and Obama is still dealing with defending his character, whether it's true or not. Hillary knew this. Bill knew this as well. So, when Hillary is not attacking Obama on stage in a debate, Bill Clinton is doing so in front of the camera. The result, Barack Obama is using his energy to defend himself against Bill Clintons accusations - true or not. He should ignore Bill Clinton and stay on target. The target is Hillary Clinton and what she is saying.

Sounds easy doesn't it? But it's not that simple. Bill Clinton is formidable because he's an ex-President, and, most importantly, when he talks, the cameras roll. But my question is this. This will probably work. Hillary will probably win the nomination because Baracks message will simply be lost. Now, I ask you, is this the kind of character that we want for President? Do you have to resort to any means necessary to obtain power, even if it means that you can't argue on the merits of what you can offer, so you have to resort to discrediting your opponent?

That sounds a lot like the kind of game that Dick Cheney runs. It doesn't make me want to vote for Barack. It doesn't make me want to vote for Hillary. It just makes me want to not even show up to vote! It disgusts me. If the best that Hillary can do is to throw crap like that at Barack Obama, I seriously have to wonder if she has any answers at all. I wish they would stop it and talk about ISSUES.

And as long as I'm talking about the "issues", the "issues" that I'm talking about are not the issues of the gay community. You will not hear any of our progressive candidates talk about gay marriage, marriage equality, hate crimes against our community... unless they are directly asked a question about it. And then, they try to skirt the issue with ambiguities that can later be explained by, "... well, that's not what I meant...". The only time a candidate has talked about us, was when Obama talked about how we had been excluded and hated by the religious community. He did not talk about equality for us.

So simply ask yourself when you pick one of these candidates, who will work for me when the become President? Who will really work to kill Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Who will really work for marriage equality in this country? Who will really work for hate crimes where are community is concerned?

I think the answer to all of those questions is, none of them. Don't expect it and you won't be disappointed. I'll try to vote for the one who will be best for our country (hey, any of them are better than what we've had the last eight years!), if I can bring myself to vote for one of them after the mud slinging settles down.