ARDIRI: Urban Art

And now for today's not-at-all-subliminal message:

And a pee-wee league cheer: "Barack, Barack! He's our *human*, if he can't do it, nobody can!"

So why did I--as a democrat--end up choosing Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton?

Hillary Clinton failed to vote on the FISA Bill and, in my opinion, her failure to show up to vote on such an essential civil liberties bill is a tacit approval of the bill which would "(1) [...] render retroactively legal the President's illegal spying program by legalizing its crux: warrantless eavesdropping on Americans, and (2) to stifle forever the sole remaining avenue for finding out what the Government did and obtaining a judicial ruling as to its legality: namely, the lawsuits brought against the co-conspiring telecoms.." (Glenn Greenwald, "Amnesty Day for Bush and Lawbreaking Telecoms", at Salon.com). For a more impassioned and better explanation visit this entry at Six Hours a Week: Adventures of a Sudden Patriot.

I am ready for change. That is, I am tired of dirty politics and the mudslinging that Clinton (and her hubby) are engaging in--i.e. putting out "the picture" (Obama wearing traditional tribal costume and turban). Either they are trying to make him "not black enough" or not "American enough"--and that is essentially a lame, dirty, and weak political move in my book.

I originally felt I should vote for Clinton as a woman, as a feminist, as the girl I was (fifteen or so years ago) in eighth grade who didn't believe it was possible for a woman to be president in America--at least not in my lifetime. But then the more I thought about it, I realized that voting for a woman—just because she is a woman—did not fit my feminist thinking and in fact was a failure to see that it should be the right person (or right *human*), for the right job. And I see Barack Obama or even, gods forbid, Ron Paul (cross my heart, hope to die, I can’t believe I just supported Ron Paul so straightforwardly; especially since he sees Roe Vs. Wade as a state issue and not a federal issue!) as the right candidate--OBAMA--(#1 choice for me), or as a better candidate than Clinton due to the race he is running (clean, straightforward on his Libertarian beliefs--Ron Paul).

However, I must say that I do think that countries such as Saudi Arabia or Iran could benefit from having a female president/queen/prime minister or what not—especially when they arrest a woman for having coffee with a male coworker at Starbucks or when they stone women to death for alleged cheating on a husband. I think that countries that so rigidly and so back-ass-wardly treat the female population could certainly use female leaders (and female leaders who don't practice Sharia Law. For a good overview of Sharia Law visit this entry at American Thinker.com).

Of course, one could say that I am being paradoxical in saying that the U.S. doesn't need a female commander, while other countries do. To this I reply: America has had some excellent female (and male) feminist who have made great strides towards gender equality in the United States. Iran and Saudi Arabia--among many others--are simply in the stone age in regards to the treatment of women.

January 2012

ARDIRI