No surprise that the New York Times endorsed Hillary Clinton today. She is, after all, the best qualified of any of the candidates, as the editors noted, not to mention the fact (probably) that she is the most electable.

What Hillary Clinton isn't, though, is a progressive. Not by any stretch of the word's definition is she a progressive.

And that's why I'm supporting Bernie Sanders, the first viable, truly progressive candidate for President in my lifetime.

Attacking wealth inequality and rebuilding the middle class by gouging the 1%, corporations, and Wall Street. Campaign finance reform. Bringing the banks to heal. Installing single payer healthcare. Rolling back the [Bill] Clinton globalization philosophy and trade agreements that swept American jobs overseas. Committing to a $1 trillion five-year investment in rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure. Making college tuition free. Closing Quantanamo Bay and curbing the NSA.

No guarantee that this revolution will succeed but, make no mistake, this agenda is revolutionary. And, hey, at least he isn't afraid to call himself a socialist and a progressive.

If you don't vote your conscience, you probably don't have much of a conscience to begin with. So I'm voting my conscience—with glee. My conscience hasn't been this happy since 1968 (Eugene McCarthy).

In November I'll contentedly and righteously vote for the best candidate on the ballot, be it Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton.

I hope it's Bernie, though.

Tags: politics