I continue to have told you so: Barack Obama

Hey, do you realize I haven't told you so in almost two and a half years? We're way past due.

Let's rewind back to the 2004 primary. I was disappointed that the Dem. nominee I was pulling for, Howard Dean, got passed over in favor of John Kerry. At the nominating convention, Barack Obama -- attractive, great voice, actually sounds sincere -- gave a rousing, almost angry speech that garnered an unforced standing ovation from the crowd, and I said -- and I quote -- "[n]ow that's the guy who should be running for president."

I continued to push this idea for the next several weeks, but you just kept shrugging me off with the ol' "he's too inexperienced." Remember? I know it was a while ago. But it still stings. And I whined in reply, "Bush doesn't have any experience, and he's been president for four years!" I'm clever that way.

Fast forward to now, and lo and behold, I was right again, and I totally told you so, jerk. (Local news note: both Clinton and Obama are in Seattle now that our vote is unexpectedly worth something.)

As one-fourth of Furdell.com, I hereby endorse Obama. And not just because I'm sexist.

First of all, I've come to the conclusion that whereas (now-almost-certain Republican nominee and pudgy old white man) McCain can't possibly beat Obama, against Clinton he has a fighting chance. I know, it's been our proud tradition since 2000 to nominate the most gratingly-unlikeable charmless smarty-pants we can find, but I think this year we should consider a different tactic. Hillary gains points when she gets weepy, but then the next day she lets out one of her demonic cackles and wipes away the goodwill.

There's more to it than that, as well. This isn't some run-of-the-mill unmarketable candidate, this is Hillary Flippin' Clinton. Those of you who didn't grow up in the South might not be aware of the illogical, unreasoned hatred that a certain type of conservative has for her. I grew up with people who, I swear, could not possibly have been able to articulate either the magnitude of nor the reason for their hatred of Hillary Clinton. I mostly blame Rush Limbaugh, who was less universally-despised at the time. Meanwhile, those same conservatives aren't particularly thrilled about a McCain candidacy -- if there's anything to unify the Republican base and send them to the polls to support McCain, it's Hillary Clinton. That may not be fair, but them's the brakes.

If I absolutely must make decisions based on policies: I've heard a lot of people compare Clinton's policies favorably to Obama's, but I don't see it. Her universal health care plan, like Obama's, isn't universal at all. (Just socialize medicine already, America. Our infant mortality rate is higher than any industrialized nation other than Latvia. What does it take? Geez.) She voted in favor of invading Iraq (which, hmm, if memory serves, yes, I seem to remember telling you so), which is bad (I should demand at least as much prescience from my presidential candidates as I have myself, right?); now she promises to pull all our troops out of Iraq within 60 days, presumably leaving behind a card that says "Please excuse our mess." Yes, the Iraq war was stupid, as so I told you, but you didn't listen, and now you've made a bed for us all to lie in, and there you have it.¹

But hey, screw it! I totally don't have to make decisions based on policies. Nobody else does! A Hillary candidacy may be the only way for the Dems to snatch defeat from the jaws of the total failure that was our government for the last eight years.

So, there you have it. James and Kimberly, I don't know where you guys lie on this debate, but you can nullify my caucus vote at the Q Café, tomorrow at 1pm.

¹ Run-on sentences are the new alliteration.