Hilary Clinton for President

Ok, I was saving this, but I had to egg Linden on:

For her passionate, studied knowledge of policy issues, for her life long dedication to public service, for her insistence that Presidential campaigns address crime and poverty in a concrete fashion, for her determination to end the war in Iraq as responsibly and expediently (in that order) as possible, and for her proven desire and ability to work with the opposition when prudent and possible, this blog enthusiastically, though not unconditionally, endorses Sen. Hilary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States of America.

When was the last time the word "embarrassment" was used to talk about Democratic Presidential campaigns but was followed by "of riches?" There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama would make the kind of President that I would be proud of and, in the spirit of full disclosure, I think you should know that I did indeed pull his lever (thats what she said). But I did so less because I think he has run the better campaign and more because he has, in my mind, more actively courted the constituencies to whom I hold the greatest allegiance: namely, college youth.

Yet, ultimately, Obama's campaign to me represents an enormous contradiction that makes it difficult to imagine what his Presidency would look like. On the one hand, Obama has criticized not only Bush's policy decisions, but the mindset that informed them: namely, the elevation of the irrational and narrow-minded over the reasonable and progressive. In other words, Obama has chastised Bush for abandoning the long and important tradition of American Pragmatism. And yet, since Iowa, Obama has seemed to do the same, cultivating a Liberal (and yes, Obama is more Liberal than HRC) ideology, exploiting economic fears, and grandstanding on abstract principles that have ballooned far out of proportion.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has shown an intelligence and, yes, tenacity, that suggests that she is indeed the one to move the commas and build the coalitions that are going to be necessary to tackle these enormous policy problems. I agree whole-heartedly with Obama that political prudence is not enough to move Washington if it is not accompanied by a groundswell of support that starts at the grassroots level and filters up through the representative system and into the legislature. And it is for that reason I hope to see him on the ticket, and in the oval office come 2017. But, in my best estimation, HRC will produce the kind of government we have so sorely lacked for the last, oh, 60 years: one that is careful and conscientious, important and compassionate, smart and limited.

Now, short of winning NC and Indiana by significant margins, and somehow getting a legit revote in Michigan and Florida--and winning--I don't see how the convention can nominate Clinton without splintering the party (which I don't think is true of the reverse), and I also believe very strongly that Hilary should accept the bottom of the ticket should that be the best the party can do, and that she should spend eight years--as she has her last 40--serving the public, and will then be in a position to be elected the first female president of the united states at the age of 69 (too easy), and the Clinton's can retire at 78, old, accomplished, and remembered, and this union will be better for it.