I hope Hillary learns something, here.

Wired.com has an article on Poland's rejection of the ACTA international treaty. That was the SOPA/PIPA debacle that Obama and company wanted so bad they could taste it, only the truth interfered.

The US Secretary of State has been up to her eyebrows in these secret treaty negotiations. None of the contents of the ACTA treaty were made public until most nations had signed onto it. Here in the US, the secrecy was considered necessary to prevent "grave damage to the nation".

I hope that Secretary Clinton learns that adhering to honest negotiation, in full public view and with full disclosure, means that surprises like this angry rejection can be avoided.

The blame, though, goes to The One that sets foreign policy. President Obama has gone behind so many backs in his career, he doesn't understand how to be honest. And he doesn't see a reason to be honest.

I hope that Secretary Clinton takes this failure of the negotiations of the last four years to heart. And I hope the Republicans bring it home to roost on both of their doorsteps.

I was raised Democrat

My parents were strong Democrats. Mom to this day thinks of herself that way. I was raised in a Democratic home, and thought that the Democrats were just better.

But I recall Gerald Ford as President of the US. He took the office at a troubled time in US history, as Richard Nixon resigned the office under the cloud of impeachment. President Ford was, to me, dependable. Nearly harmless, he didn't do much to inspire my loyalty or pride, or disappointment. That last is important.

Jimmy Carter failed miserably, in his campaign for President, to convince me that he had any credentials, or that he committed himself to anything I found worthwhile. Having served in the US Navy, I found Carter's inability to pronounce nuclear (new-clee-ar, not Carter's new-kyu-ler) correctly to be petty, but still it biased my antipathy against Carter.

The Democrats have failed to put forth a candidate since then to make me reconsider my Republican-by-default political leanings.

In 2008 I decried Hilary Clinton, B. Hussein Obama, Sen. McCain, pretty much universally. The most promising move of the campaign, I thought, was nominating Sarah Palin for VP candidate. I thought at the time this meant that the staid, old-white-guy, you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours good old boy clicque running the GOP were changing, were changing in their perception of reality and of the needs of the nation.

McCain, being McCain, should not have been elected. He shouldn't have been nominated. His war record not withstanding, his morals and ethics seemed entirely too . . fluid. And the Republican party has shown itself completely immune to ethics, morals, change, and any interest in serving Republicans.

I still think the stated values of the Republican party are superior -- sound economics, defense of freedoms, limited government. I do *not* believe the Republican National Committee has any intention of doing anything toward any of those stated values.

So, on Politico.com, an opinion piece by Caddell and Shoen leap off in a new direction: Draft Hillary Clinton.

In 2008 I hated Hillary with a passion. I felt that remaining married to husband and past President Bill Clinton, she showed an historic lack of character. I felt that leaving Arkansas to run for the Senate from New York was mercenary, shallow, and an abuse of the people of New York. I never asked any Arkansas people if they missed having the Clintons when Bill and Hillary moved back East after their terms in Washington, D.C.

And, yet, the Republicans have shown themselves to be too heavily invested in the runaway economy to correct anything substantial. The leading Republican candidates, Gingrich, Perry, Romney, are all proof that the Republican Party intends to keep running the-next-good-old-boy in line.

And I found myself thinking, "I could vote for Hillary."

The nation will have to watch Hillary, if she is elected, closely. Her anti-gun position is as adamant as B. Hussein Obama and his Chicago thug pals. Hillary has the labor unions behind her, with all of their special interests that seem to support wrecking the profit motive and creation of work in America.

But she is still less scary than Obama or the GOP (where is the "Grand" part in "Grand Old Party", anymore?) candidates.

Hillary hasn't changed since the Clinton Administration, nor since 2008. I haven't changed my views that much since then. But the times, and the field of "hopefuls" has gotten really scary for me.

I could easily change my mind. All it would take would be a Republican candidate superior to Cain. Or a Democratic VP nominee with less appeal than VP Joe Biden. Any number of things could happen before next November, that might convince me to change my mind.

But, wow is that startling, to think that I might vote for Hillary Clinton for President in 2012, with no regrets. Amazing.