I've made a candidate choice

[ritaxis]

I have to endorse Edwards. After Obama said he wouldn't rule out nuking Pakistan, and Clinton embraced the lobbyists, Edwards rejected both those things and also calls for reform in the Democratic Party.

What we'll get, though, is whoever shapes up to be the most reactionary and unelectable. Probably, at this point, Clinton. But starting now, I'm working for Edwards.

Comments

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

I don't think I could support any candidate who *did* categorically rule out use of nukes on Pakistan. Pakistan is a nuclear power, and if they start throwing them around, it seems stupid to me to have made even a non-binding promise not to respond in kind.

(Doesn't mean I think it's likely to be desirable, mind you; but I see no good that can be served by promising not to use the big hammer if a big-hammer situation comes along. It just encourages adventurism.)

[rdeck.livejournal.com]

The "big hammer" approach is simply insanity, like setting off a hand grenade at a wedding reception because someone takes a shot with a hand gun.

Edwards may be the best of the bad lot that has a chance.