Unreal

Unreal

Thanks to the John McCain/Sarah Palin supporters who condemned the extremist FREAKS at a McCain/Palin rally recently.  This is unreal.

These FREAKS were not only anti-Muslim, they were also anti-reality.  See for yourself; follow this link and scroll down for the video.  

Daddy Fight & '08

Daddy Fight & ‘08

Like the angry father who can’t or won’t admit that a younger man will eventually replace him, John McOedipus exhibited nothing but disdain and disregard toward Barack Obama during Friday’s debate.  It was stunning and pathetically obvious from the initial handshake that McCain thought:  “how dare HE be on this stage with ME!”  Furthermore, it was horrifically reminiscent of the early debates between Judas Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont in the summer ’06, as grumpy Joe, then Oedipus Lieberman, adopted the hubris that afflicts so many tragic figures.  Perhaps McCain should spend less time with narcissistic Joe and more time with dignified Republicans like Richard Lugar to treat his current psychological disorder.  In the cults of personality and orbits of psycho-dynamics, there is a personality factor here that’s quite legible even to the most naïve of eyes.  And no one likes a b@stard of a father. 

But this Freudian family subtext extends way beyond McCain.  Just look at the pundit class, who can’t or won’t admit that Obama won because he had the right temperament and gravitas that Americans unequivocally desire in our leaders.  Hell, it’s obvious that Obama was the winner in poll after poll.  But despite that, the pundit class, like a group of obnoxious sons and daughters in one, f*cked-up, dysfunctional family, SO want a daddy fight in a major way. 

It was laughable to read mean-girl Maureen Dowd—who STILL has Catholic gossip-girl cafeteria disorder—on Sunday again miss the mark in her dreadful analogy to a A Few Good Men.  Mika Brzezinski, whom I normally like, followed this morning on Morning Smoe claiming that Obama should’ve and could’ve been meaner.  Et tu, Mika? 

We DEFINITELY need therapy for this Freudian family disorder, and maybe when Chimpy, who has HUGE daddy-issues that will be on full display in Oliver Stone’s W., leaves office we will alas be free from this mass political psychosis.  

A Sign of The Armageddon?

The Republican National Convention is underway and the only thing I can say positively about it is that McCain is rightfully downplaying it because Hurricane Gustav is bearing down on the coast of Louisiana and Mississippi as I am typing.

So, late last week, the media cycle should have belonged to Barack and his wonderfully moving speech on Thursday night. Instead, the weekend media cycle belonged to Sarah Palin and John McCain's campaign. Now, to be fair, McCain's choice was always going to be named on Friday. The reason for the buzz, the hype, and the attention is that NO ONE saw this coming. The press is all a twitter because no one outside of Alaska really knows who she is. News people across the country are working 24/7, vetting McCain's choice as his Veep running mate.

I was getting ready to sit down to do some homework on this when an email from a former student (the VERY intelligent EB) sent me the following email that details Ms. Palin and her background:


Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.

Huh?

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:

She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.1
Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.2
She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. 3
Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.4
She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.5
She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.6
How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.7
This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.

We also asked Alaska MoveOn members what the rest of us should know about their governor. The response was striking. Here's a sample:

She is really just a mayor from a small town outside Anchorage who has been a governor for only 1.5 years, and has ZERO national and international experience. I shudder to think that she could be the person taking that 3AM call on the White House hotline, and the one who could potentially be charged with leading the US in the volatile international scene that exists today. —Rose M., Fairbanks, AK

She is VERY, VERY conservative, and far from perfect. She's a hunter and fisherwoman, but votes against the environment again and again. She ran on ethics reform, but is currently under investigation for several charges involving hiring and firing of state officials. She has NO experience beyond Alaska. —Christine B., Denali Park, AK

As an Alaskan and a feminist, I am beyond words at this announcement. Palin is not a feminist, and she is not the reformer she claims to be. —Karen L., Anchorage, AK

Alaskans, collectively, are just as stunned as the rest of the nation. She is doing well running our State, but is totally inexperienced on the national level, and very much unequipped to run the nation, if it came to that. She is as far right as one can get, which has already been communicated on the news. In our office of thirty employees (dems, republicans, and nonpartisans), not one person feels she is ready for the V.P. position.—Sherry C., Anchorage, AK

She's vehemently anti-choice and doesn't care about protecting our natural resources, even though she has worked as a fisherman. McCain chose her to pick up the Hillary voters, but Palin is no Hillary. —Marina L., Juneau, AK

I think she's far too inexperienced to be in this position. I'm all for a woman in the White House, but not one who hasn't done anything to deserve it. There are far many other women who have worked their way up and have much more experience that would have been better choices. This is a patronizing decision on John McCain's part- and insulting to females everywhere that he would assume he'll get our vote by putting "A Woman" in that position.—Jennifer M., Anchorage, AK

So Governor Palin is a staunch anti-choice religious conservative. She's a global warming denier who shares John McCain's commitment to Big Oil. And she's dramatically inexperienced.

In picking Sarah Palin, John McCain has made the religious right very happy. And he's made a very dangerous decision for our country.

Sources:

1. "Sarah Palin," Wikipedia, Accessed August 29, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

2. "McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate," NARAL Pro-Choice America, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17515&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=1

3. "Sarah Palin, Buchananite," The Nation, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17736&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=2
4. "'Creation science' enters the race," Anchorage Daily News, October 27, 2006
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17737&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=3

5. "Palin buys climate denial PR spin—ignores science," Huffington Post, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17517&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=4

6. "McCain VP Pick Completes Shift to Bush Energy Policy," Sierra Club, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17518&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=5

"Choice of Palin Promises Failed Energy Policies of the Past," League of Conservation Voters, August 29, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17519&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=6

"Protecting polar bears gets in way of drilling for oil, says governor," The Times of London, May 23, 2008
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=17520&id=13661-5037574-O_1i0Zx&t=7

7 "McCain met Palin once before yesterday," MSNBC, August 29, 2008

I kept the sources in there in case anyone wanted to check them out for themselves and all great writers cite sources. (BTW, The author of the letter is a member of the MoveOn Organization.)

Anyway, I keep wondering (not that I am a McCain supporter) why McCain picked Palin if he was looking for a strong female running mate, and looking for Hilary supporters that feel the Obama-Biden ticket is not for them. There are Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins from Maine - both feminists with solid political backgrounds and experience. (And they are both wonderfully warm people - I have met them both.) If he was looking for governor material, why not pick Jodi Rell, who brought CT government back from the embarrassment that was Rowland.

In short, there is only three reasons to pick Palin. She is for big oil, she has pull in the one state that has untapped oil and thus, has contacts there, and she brings the religious right in from the cold into the Republican Party fold.

I implore everyone - if you did not think this elections was important to the path of our country before, it surely is now. Please get your facts, register, and make sure you get to the polls in November. The future of the country depends on it...

Image & The Joe Biden Pick

IMAGE & THE JOE BIDEN PICK

Sure, Joe Biden brings a great deal to an Obama-Biden ticket. Biden brings all those years of working in D.C., extensive knowledge about foreign affairs, and a long record of working with respected colleagues and dreaded trolls from the dark side of the moon. But let’s face it, folks: Uncle Joe also brings his big mouth, which, at times, suffers from chronic, verbal diarrhea. Also Uncle Joe, as much as I like the guy and agree with the choice, brings some mess-ups from yore that will probably resurface for a cycle or two in the media smear machine.

The most important element, though, that Biden brings to the ticket involves image dynamics. The elder, grey-haired Biden helps to neutralize those skeptics (and thought-disordered folks) that think Senator Obama is too young or too inexperienced for the job. Moreover, the rather lively, you-talk-too-much-and-sometimes-you-never-shut-up Joe serves as an effective contrast to Senator McCain who frequently comes off as tired, as slow-moving, as tripping over his tele-prompted words, and, quite frankly, as old. And by no means do I mean disrespect to Senator McCain who has heroically served our country with distinction. This is why I suspect that the ever dapper, the ever sexy locks, porn-star-named Mitt Romney will do image justice to a McCain ticket.

The fact of the matter is that far too many Americans are NOT willing to educate themselves. They avoid learning policy differences, how to vote in their best interests, and what matters most to their futures and the future of their country. The medium is the massage, after all. Image dictates a lot more than meets the eye, and in this presidential race image might even matter more.

And The Winner of the Dem. Veepstakes Is...

Barack Obama has chosen Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate. They are set to appear today (Saturday Aug. 23) at 3 PM EDT at a rally in Springfield, Ill. where Obama began his campaign 19 months ago.

Discuss...

American Prayer

As those of us who have been glued to presidential primary news, especially blogs such as this one, Obama has had several music videos made endorsing his campaign.

Released this week is the latest and, in my opinion, the most moving one. It is a song featuring lyrics by Brit Dave Stewart (of Eurythmics fame). It features many other singers and actors, and also has clips of MLK, Jr's powerful and moving speeches.

The video is approximately five minutes long and is in black and white (there is no need to adjust your set). Click here to get to the link and watch the music video which also includes Stewart's reasoning behind the song and other tidbits.

P.S.: Before the McCain supporters start in again about how Obama is a celebrity, yada yada, etc. and so on, I do want to point out that at least Barack did not whore himself out like McCain did in this clip from the blockbuster Wedding Crashers. Either McCain doesn't know the meaning of the word celebrity or Alzheimer's has already set in on the ol' fella.

ADJUSTMENTS

ADJUSTMENTS

I haven’t been able to blog as much, play guitar, or pleasure read. Slowly but surely, my better half & I strive to interweave strands of our former selves into our newly adjusted routines that revolve around raising three beautiful and healthy children.

ATM is getting back into swimming, and I just learned a Concrete Blonde song. We hope to read more than just news snippets here and there—the less about the MSM’s summer ’08 stars, Brett Favre and Paris Hilton, the better. And once the three month old gets into a steady sleeping pattern, maybe we can escape for an adult night out—even if it’s to drive around the block a few times.

This adjustment period has indeed offered us learning opportunities, aside from getting adept at changing diapers in the sand at the beach—talk about a summer Olympic sport—or managing three at the grocery store amidst the hostile on-lookers who scowl as if to say: “the kiddy-tracked crowd is only allowed here very early in the morning or very late night—so f*ck off.”

The one major realization I’ve had is that it’s not easy to adjust. I would go so far as to say that in many cases our natural inclination is NOT TO adjust. Sadly, for many individuals it’s far easier to stay the same, to think the same way, to behave the same, or, in this political climate: to stay the course. That’s why I’m not at all surprised there isn’t more of a spread in the general election tracking polls between John McCain and Barack Obama.

It’s tragic that American society still grapples with all the same, recurring issues that require enormous adjustments to change things ever so slightly: the Iraq War, socio-economic inequality, poverty, racism, sexism, and homophobia. Certainly, it’s not so tragic, I’ve come to realize, to believe that some small adjustment can create some kind of change. The question is: how do those of us who can adjust help those who cannot...adjust to the idea of change? After all, changing a diaper in the sand at the beach isn’t so hard as it seems.

The Massage

The Massage

When I wake up in the morning—or lately, when I first ooze from one state of new-baby zombie-ness to another, I usually get my daily dose of MSM (mainstream media) therapy. What can I say: it’s addicting.

After being awake for about a half hour—I usually crawl out of my coffin at 5:30 am, at 6 am I check out Morning Smoe to get my morning dose. Yeah, it’s a sick, twisted co-dependency that I’ve yet to shake. 12-step, you say? Nah. But what I’ve noticed during my Morning Smoe fix is that I get the first few lines—pun intended—of the MSM daily script and I’m sure to hear these talking points reverberate throughout the day.

Take this morning, for example. On the Smoe, Mika had on Silly Willy, Pat Buchanan and Mike “probate court” Barnicle. One of the main topics: the latest match-up polls from Newsweek and other news agencies of McShame vs. Obama. When it came time to discuss the Newsweek poll, a poll showing Obama at 51% and McLame at 36%, one of Mika’s boys made some comment to the effect that Newsweek must’ve conducted its poll at Starbucks on the upper west side of Manhattan. I wonder which goon came up with that one. Sure, it might be true noting that these Newsweek polling numbers are a bit off when compared to the other polls. But really, does THAT matter?

Let’s get back to the script. As can be expected, I heard the same line uttered by Mike Barnicle this evening during his guest-hosting gig on PhlegmBall when he discussed the Newsweek poll. Sticking to the script, Barnicle reiterated that Newsweek must’ve conducted the poll at a Starbucks on the upper west side of Manhattan. Coincidence? Yeah—and I’m a Republican.

The bottom line is: mainstream media talking points exist and thus they constitute a script on a daily basis—just dabble in some MSM addiction yourself, and you shall see. The talking heads generally follow this script to rev up the echo chamber din, to shape perceptions, and to reinforce the notion that for many the media is the…massage.

It's Over

Weekly Wednesday Presidential Politics - 6/11/07

(IC note: This blog has been dormant far too long. Indeed, I haven't even posted here since February, with my "Explaining Limbaugh" column. Therefore, I've decided to run one of my recent blog posts from Presidential Politics for America. Enjoy.)

It's over. History has been made. Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party.

Yet, with all of the stories that slowly trickled in last week - the seventeen senate superdelegates, Clyburn, Carter, Clinton ready to concede, Clinton letting go staff, Clinton not conceding, Clinton wanting to meet face to face with Obama, Clinton interested in VP, Obama only interested in offering the VP if Clinton declines - it was easy to forget the big picture.

This was an historic event on several levels.

First, the magnitude of this upset is unparalleled in modern primary politics. Hillary Clinton, a lion in the Senate, with a 25-point lead in 2007 for the Democratic nomination, and with her spouse as the most popular member of the party and perhaps the most popular politician in the country, was beaten by a dark-skinned, mixed-race, first-term U.S. Senator with a Muslim sounding name who was just over two years removed from state politics when he declared for the United States presidency. Read that sentence again.

Second, the story everyone is talking about. For the first time in this country's history, a non-white has been nominated for President by a major political party. As an extension, if Obama wins on November 4th, he will be the first person with at least 50% African heritage to be the President of any country in Western Civilization (Europe, North America, South America).

Third, finally, and most important to me, I have to turn to a Hillary Clinton quote from last night. Who would have thought that it would be Hillary Clinton, not Barack Obama, who could put forth the quote of the contest? I have been following this primary for 18 months and in her speech last night, Clinton had my favorite line of the primary. Nothing sums up the ground breaking experience of the 2008 Democratic Primary better than a snippet of her simple prose. I know it's not Shakespeare, Jefferson, Glenn Cheney, or Dylan. I know it's clichéd. I know it seems obvious looking back on it. But she said it, and she's absolutely right.

"...we saw millions of Americans registering to vote for the first time, raising money for the first time, knocking on doors, making calls, talking to their friends and neighbors, mothers and fathers lifting their little girls and their little boys on to their shoulders and whispering,

"'See, you can be anything you want to be.'"

The crowd erupted, as it should have. Young minorities and young girls who saw the Democratic Primary come down to a woman and a black man must have been inspired. Our society isn't perfect. We haven't torn down all the barriers. We haven't convinced all the racists and misogynists of their archaic and misguided thoughts, and through aesthetic affirmative action, we've even gone too far in the opposite direction at times...

But those young girls and minorities haven't experienced any of that yet. They're new and innocent and untouched by the evils of prejudice and thoughtless malevolence. The most publicized and talked about news event of their young lives had a black man and white woman vying for the nomination of the Democratic Party. I don't think we can yet accurately predict the far-reaching effect this one political event will have on the next generation, but we can hope that the very best was taken from it.

And as we wave good-bye to the last few pre-19th Amendment seniors, as the generation that grew up in pre-Civil Rights slowly fades away, as the memory of the George Wallace south diminishes, and as my generation of Rodney King, OJ Simpson, and affirmative action begins its exit in a few decades, the generation of watching Clinton-Obama with wide eyes and big dreams will take our place. It was Dr. King's dream and it's becoming a reality.

So yes, the Democratic Primary is over, but it might not be the only thing that is. Over is the time where we walk into an election cycle with full confidence that we will see a white man vying against a white man to lead a country that is half female and steadily growing less white. Over is the time where we discount a candidate's viability because of the way they look. Over is the time where a girl or a black child gives up on their dream to hold the highest office in the land because of what they see when they look in the mirror.

It's over.

So I apologize if you checked into Presidential Politics for America this morning and wanted to see me break down numbers (unnecessary) or finish off my Barack Obama Veepstakes (Friday) or preview Obama-McCain (all summer). I just had to take a minute with a wide-angle lens and appreciate what we've experienced. I urge you to do the same.

Deal or No Deal

Deal or No Deal

“Mission Accomplished” George W. Bush will appear on an episode of NBC’s game show Deal or No Deal tomorrow night. Apparently, he’s honoring a veteran from Iraq, W.’s “no deal” of a fiasco. Hey, at least the costs of the war—deliberately kept out of the media spotlight—are alas receiving mass prime time coverage if only in a cameo moment. Too bad, though, that W. didn’t honor all of our Iraq Veterans—fallen and alive—more often, more seriously, rather than be so obvious to select the best Nielsen ratings publicity op available.

Boy blunder and his party stay true to form, though, making deals, re-shaping reality, and bilking the American public to suit their needs. And truth be told, they are pretty good at what they do: with Gas prices soaring, home mortgages foreclosing, spending power diminishing, the market yo-yoing, jobs terminating, Iraq burning, local municipal budgets shrinking, in a year when it would seem that the planets are aligned for the Democrats to take the White House, the Republicans are well positioned for Bush Term 3, with sold-his-soul McCain, a deal most Americans can’t afford.

But let’s face it: Part of this deal involves the internecine warfare in the Democratic Party. On one side there’s Clinton—amorphous lady hate who NOW casts her self as shot drinking, Crown Royale-ing, gun-slinging Scranton girl. On the other side there’s Obama—an elitist, non-patriot, 60s radical, non-wearing flag pin snob.  The least said about these false characterizations, the better.  

Divided and framed by the MSM, they and the party still stand…for now. But the question remains: can either one of them stand against McCain in the general, now that McCain has pricked his finger in blood rites with Grover Norquist, almost every agent of intolerance on the right whom McCain once disdained, the MSM goons—just take a look at Frank Rich’s column today, and a shadowy, quickly organizing attack-group resembling a Swiftboat junta for ‘08? A year to six months ago, the answer to this question would be yes. But as the Republicans do what they do best, as Clinton and Obama duke it out, as the MSM echo chamber continues emphasizing the unimportant while de-emphasizing the all-too-important, as the talking heads, led by Tweety Matthews et al, continue their “bromance” with McCain, chances are that what would be a “no deal” Bush Term 3 unfortunately might be the consolation “deal” we will have to accept.

Exits & No Exits

Exits & No Exits

The media narrative this week has been “exits,” especially on exiting the race for ’08. But the one exit that matters most—from Iraq—has been yet again pushed to the narrative background along with the fraud surrounding the Afghanistan arms contract, which once again smacks of the Bush administration’s inept management of the wars they wage—you know, the ones that bomb, bomb McCainy supports.

Instead of the Iraq War, which just hit its 5 year mark, or Bush being the main character in the media exit novella, Hillary has been cast in that role and what a prima donna she’s become. The sad part about this opera is that it seems like it’s going to end like all operas end, in tragedy. I can almost hear the sounds of Puccini’s Madame Butterfly.

There’s no question at this point: Hillary should go, not just for the party’s sake but also for her political future. The math is not on her side; the momentum is not on her side; the media is certainly not on her side—the least said about the latest lecture from the Dolores Umbridge of the right wing, Smeggy Noonan, the better; and the primary electorate is not on her side.

More importantly, in a strange way, Hillary’s campaign has NOT been on her side: Fumble after fumble, mistake after mistake, misstatement after “misspoke,” even with the few but well-publicized fumbles in the Obama campaign that perhaps could’ve worked to their advantage, the Clinton campaign has been disastrous with media-emergency management. They sadly resemble “heckuva job” Brownie—sorry. It’s been a dismaying collage of a whole lot of money, a whole lot of bravado for a whole lot of incompetence.

It’s interesting that a subtext to the media exit narrative has been Hillary’s contingency plans, if and when she decides to exit the race. Governor of New York? Senate Majority leader? On Friday evening’s Countdown and in the blogosphere, this story took hold. And what’s even more interesting, as Johnathan Alter mentioned on Countdown, there’s even been chatter about Obama’s contingency plan, should he become the nominee and lose to bomb, bomb McCainy, a media lover-boy whose many misstatements and frightening fumbles, along with the Iraq war, lurk in the media background as Hillary and Barack are on center stage.

Geeze. If only the media shifted its attention from whether or not Hillary would exit, who is urging her to exit—granted, she should go, what she will and could do when she exits, what Barack might do should he lose the general and exit the senate...to an exit from Iraq—given that now over 4,000 American lives have been sacrificed, maybe we could seriously think about what needs to be done once George W. Bush thankfully exits from a job he should have never had in the first place.

American Dream Disorder

American Dream Disorder

Like Gatsby fixating on the green light and the girl he once lost, like Hester Prynne fantasizing about an escape from puritan New England with her paramour pastor Dimmesdale, like phony Holden wishing to live a “mute” life with a “mute” wife out west, many of us Democrats, I fear, get caught in our dreams just like our more famous figures in American literature.

Yes, it appears Barack will win the nomination and Hillary will most likely lose. With an opposition to the war from the beginning, with what seems to be an unblemished public record, with an uncanny, superficial resemblance to JFK, further enhanced by Kennedy family endorsements, and most of all, with a message that resonates and a life partner who is as equally if not more convincing than the candidate himself, Senator Obama has built an insurmountable momentum among Democratic party voters. Aided and abetted by a mainstream media dying for a “new” narrative and an indirect means by which to drive the nails into Hillary’s coffin, Barack has justly carpe diem(ed) the moment.

But the mainstream media narratives are shifting. And electoral reality with many Americans, whether or not the pundit class recognizes it, conveys another story.

In the past couple of weeks, we’ve already previewed the summer & fall Republican attack narratives that the mainstream media will no doubt intensify: “The Patriot Question, The Barack Edition.” They’ve already gone after Michelle, and they will stop at nothing equating Barack’s name to some of our more renowned “radical” Islamist enemies. Have we conveniently forgotten about our swift-boating, presidential campaign past?

But lady of mass instigation, Maureen Dowd, in today’s column, suggests that attacks against Obama’s patriotism “may not have the same traction.” Silly Maureen, these attacks already have gained some traction. It seems that Dowd also likes to dream and fantasize. And while I would NEVER suggest that the ever-astute Frank Rich has a touch of the American Dream Disorder, I’m admittedly concerned. In today’s column, “McCain Channels His Inner Hillary,” Rich highlights what many Democrats are either overlooking or completely disregarding in their dream states: Senator Obama will not have an easy campaign against Senator McCain, who has adopted the Hillary “experience” offensive, despite what some early polling and match-ups forecast.

As Rich duly notes, Senator McCain is far more appealing to Democrats and liberals than what one might initially think. That Bomb, Bomb McCainy invokes the wrath of Flush Limfart and Mann Coulter only increases the appeal, especially among those Reagan Democrats who’ve been a part of the Clinton coalition—a coalition of the dwindling. Perhaps this is why in must-win Florida polls, as Rich emphasizes, McCain decisively beats Obama. But even Rich suggests that for McCain and his supporters, “The Patriot Question, The Barack Edition” will NOT have much force in the wake of the RNC’s overtly racist “macaca” days. I think not.

“The Patriot Question, The Barack Edition” has already taken foot; just take a look at Steve Croft’s segment on tonight’s 60 Minutes Sunday. Croft interviewed a group of Ohio blue collar men who said they didn’t like Obama because he wasn’t patriotic and he was a Muslim. Lies, I know. But what we are witnessing here is a tectonic narrative shift; the campaign against Obama is all over the web—whether you are looking for it or not; and quite frankly, Senator McCain is a perfect character foil to set this story into hyper-drive: Veteran, former prisoner of war, hawk, older statesman.

Like it or not, many people respect McCain’s “story” and his commitment to our country. Many people do see him as paradigm of…patriotism, the very thing the echo chamber clamors Barack is not. While I will certainly support Senator Obama’s candidacy—I do believe he is unequivocally the better choice, I do fear that many Democrats and pundits are only dreaming if they think that the RNC smearing and fearing won’t work because it already has.

Target Michelle

Target Michelle

Here we go again: Apparently, all Republican & Mainstream Media Talking Heads received their Marching Points Memo yesterday on the ever elegant Michelle Obama. Yeah, I sort of figured this out when on Larry King last night right winger David Scum (Frum) made a BIG deal about Mrs. Obama's comment in which she asserted that this was the first time she was proud of her country.

This morning, on Morning Smoe, Joe Scarborough almost foamed at the mouth over the comment. Even when Mika Brzezinski tried to tame the Smoe and explain that there was much ado about nothing, Smoe practically went into apoplexy. Perhaps Smoe was auditioning for Best Actor-R in a morning show drama. Puhleeze!

What do we do with this information? Take it in--and get ready. It's quite obvious that an emerging "smear" strategy against Barack is gaining traction: Question patriotism, point out his and her disrespect to our country, call them...leftists, if not fun-loving Muslim sympathizers. This strategy will be all the more in play once he--and I suspect he will--secures the nomination and crazy--national security--Bomb, Bomb McCainy is the extreme patriot whom Obama will run against.

In an election when we Democrats invest in change, when we try to look forward to the future, post Bush, which this country so desperately needs, the Republicans, I'm afraid, won't change a thing, including how they target and smear their opposition.

A Super Mess

A Super Mess

While superdelegates to some may seem strange, they are, in fact, elected officials and party “insiders” who can vote independently in a primary season when it appears that the voters can’t make up their minds.

As talk show host Randi Rhodes discussed on her show today, the superdelegates are becoming--in many ways--a super mess for the Democratic party that has the planets aligned--as of this moment--to reclaim the White House in November. The question is, as Rhodes has so beautifully said: For the Democrats, will this mess create the “snatching of a defeat” from what seems to be the “jaws of victory?” In other words, are we Democrats doomed yet again?

What exactly is “messy,” though, remains in the details.

Take the state of Massachusetts, for example, a primary state where Senator Clinton decisively won. Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, a superdelegate, recently endorsed and campaigned for Senator Obama. But Senator Kerry’s state on super Tuesday did NOT give a win to Senator Obama. Should he be called to his superdelegate excellency, Senator Kerry will go against the will of his voters and pledge for Senator Obama, which does seem admittedly problematic. Obviously, what applies to Senator Kerry also applies to Senator Kennedy, who will most likely exert his super delegate power for Obama, the candidate he has quite publicly endorsed.

In California, Congresswoman Lynn Woosley has endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton. However, the congresswoman’s Marin and Somona counties DECISIVELY voted for Senator Obama. Like the good senators from Massachusetts, Congresswoman Woosley may also very well vote against the will of her constituents should she have to activate her superdelegate power.

Things are messy. But as we slouch toward the nomination, as we endure the twists and turns of the mainstream media narratives, as we Democrats hope that we can bridge the divides in our party, will we look upon this mess a year from now as something we simply cleaned or will our super mess allow for more messes that another Republican White House can’t help making?

Dowdworld Drama

Dowdworld Drama

Get your pencils ready.

Recall the time you took the SAT? And those heinous bubbles?

Well, get over your standardized test-taking anxieties: it’s time to play.

Breathe. Namaste.

Let the force flow…

Ready….GO:

The reasons for the love-fest drama at the democratic debate on Thursday night:

A. Mother Superior Pelosi had after-mass, Sunday detentions.
B. Rev. Reid ruler-knuckled the bad girl—her frat-husband Bill—and the seldom misbehavin’ Barack.
C. Free-wheelin’ Uncle Howie brought it to these insubordinate candidates
D. Hill and Barry wanted to flip-off Mean Girl, always-startin’ drama Dowd for her latest high school-cafeteria antics in her most recent columns.
E. All of the above.

Albeit D is a tempting choice because in Dowdworld, the more drama troll Dowd starts, the more she can write about, I’m selecting E: All of the Above.

WHY the love-fest drama happened is one thing; WHAT the love-fest produced is quite another: speculation over whether or not Hillary and Barack would consider running on the same ticket.

Here’s the real drama that Dowd in her solipsistic, latter mid-life crisis-induced Dowdworld overlooks: Hillary DEFINITELY needs Barack on her ticket; he, in contrast, probably won’t need her.

Yes, should Hillary get the nod, many have said that she might turn to Latino Richardson, she might turn to military man Clark, she might turn to the ever photogenic, sexy white guy Evan Bayh. But after a collage of recent ill-advised blunders, after the “routing” in South Carolina, after losing so much of the base to Barack in the primaries, after Kennedy, Oprah, et al, Hillary, should she squeak by—and should she really want to win in November, would commit a colossal crime for NOT picking Barack.

Of course, for this fairy tale ticket to happen Senator Obama would have to agree. Therein lies another potential colossal problem: in order to attempt to bring his “voters” to her and in order to attempt a win in November, Obama would have to bypass the recent history of Clintonian assault and really rise above for the sake of the team and the party.

Barack, though, doesn’t have the same “ticket” drama should he get the nomination. Truth be told, he could easily leave Billary in the dust and simply move on with another running mate who would strengthen his ticket in ways that Billary cannot. Thus, one can’t help wonder whether or not Billary goes gentle into that good night, pushing beyond a catastrophic loss and, well, repudiation, to campaign for the sake of the party and for the sake of a win despite NOT BEING on the ticket.

These are the real dramas unfolding in the political meta-narrative that continue to take shape day in and day out; these are the stories that beg consideration, analysis, and less high school soap opera treatment that Dowdworld Drama emphasizes.

Dividing & Diverting

Dividing & Diverting

On this week’s edition of the mainstream media narrative, we find one of their more tried and true numbers: dividing and diverting. Last week, we had everybody and their grandmother going to confession; this time around, we have everyone dividing…and the mainstream media diverting us from the real news that matters most.

It began late last week. Extra! Extra!—everyone get diverted by it: “Barack did this MLK event here, while Hill had to save face and do her MLK event there.” “Hillary’s losing the black vote.” “Barack’s alienating whites.” “It’s all about race and gender.” “It’s all about Bill (we like u, but would you PUHLEEZE shut up!)” “Dems. are divided here; they are divided there; they are divided everywhere.”

Tensions grew more heated in Monday’s debate. Hillary and Barack were trying to channel their inner “Hit Me with Your Best Shot:” Barack showed Hillary that he was a “real tough cookie” by mentioning her time with Walmart; Hill put another “notch in her lipstick case” by claiming that Barack once represented a slum lord. So as Hill and Barry went into death-match mode with John Edwards as the only real victor, the mainstream media had set its story no sooner than the debate ended: the Dems. are d-i-v-i-d-e-d. And what’s worse, both the Clinton and Obama campaigns blindly followed in sync with one scud attack after another. The latest word is that yet another truce has been reached.

MEANWHILE, on the other side of the moon—they clearly don’t know what to do or whom to choose. Adrift with Huck Finn, Slick Mick, Nosferatu Giuliani and Rising McCain, the Republicans are far more divided than the Dems. And yet had the media focused on what the republican candidates didn’t do to commemorate MLK’s memory and/or to court minority voters, maybe we could’ve had a fair and balanced discussion on race. Had the media put more emphasis on the 935 lies the Bush administration told about Iraq rather than the half-truths and untruths of Billary and Barack, maybe we could’ve focused more on the war. Had the media greatly publicized the 720 million dollar a day cost of the Iraq war, maybe we could focus less on Hillary’s and Barack’s positions and more on Bush’s bad decisions. Had the media not put the dividing democrat narrative in the foreground, maybe more people wouldn’t have been diverted from the troubling news about the Gaza strip that stays in the background. Should the Democratic Party and its candidates become more focused on taking the White House, they will hopefully shift the focus from these inflated divisions in the party to the many divisions George W. Bush and his party have caused for the last seven years.

America's Next Top Confessor

America’s Next Top Confessor

Did Mother Superior Pelosi humble those democratic candidates into good behavior for Tuesday night’s debate? Did Reverend Reid tell them to play nice? And what about Tweety Matthews’ mea culpa monologue? Was it as sincere as it could’ve or should’ve been? Or does he need to spend more time on his “hail Hillaries” because he’s been such a dirty little boy?

This week’s mainstream media narrative should’ve been entitled “America’s Next Top Confessor.” Because I have a Ph.D courtesy of my Catholic upbringing—I do love my mom and her guilt tripping—and my Jesuit education in the metaphysics of guilt, let me break this story down for you.

It started late Monday evening, when the 24/7 mainstream media reported that Hillary and Barack made nice-nice: they called a truce. Hillary and her surrogates made some heinously “ill-advised” comments about MLK and Barack’s drug confessions, and the mainstream media hyper-inflated Bill Clinton’s “fairy tale” description of Barack’s stances on Iraq to suggest that everyone in the Clinton camp and their grandmothers were full-blown racists. The consequences of confession continued into the debate on Tuesday night when everyone was really well-behaved, including Brother Tim Russert, whom you know hates Hillary more than Satan himself and those bad-breath nuns who silenced all us Catholic boys in grade school.

While Hill’s and Barry’s truce didn’t last too long—on Wednesday, they were at it again with all kinds of insults both subtle and not-so-subtle, Hillary did score yet another model confession with none other than the one, the only, the most fabulous…can I get a drum beat, puhleeze!: Ms. Tyra Banks. Appearing on Tyra’s show, Hill told T. that yeah, Bill embarrassed the heck out of her with that skanky Monica episode. With some prayer and more prayer and continued prayer coupled with introspection, Hill told T. how she got down with her bad self to tai-chi her anger, her resentment, and her pain. And Hill went on to confess that that’s the advice she gives scorned women everywhere: just be your self. OKaaaaaaay. Like it or not, though, Hill is unequivocally the runner-up in becoming….America’s Next Top Confessor.

But the winner of America’s Next Top Confessor—thanks to David Brock’s awesome work at Media Matters, is Tweety Matthew’s confession (sort of) of being sexist in his coverage of Hillary Clinton and female politicians in general. For years now, Tweety has been utterly unfair and un-balanced in his treatment of Hillary Clinton. Thankfully, on Thursday he confessed to it—well, maybe he was told to do so or else. Call me a cynic: I don’t believe Tweety’s “I’m sorry” for a minute. We Catholic boyz know when one of our own—like him or not—is being sincere or just succumbing to Catholic guilt in its most torturous form. Everyone knows that when interrogation includes torture, the victim simply confesses to stop the pain. So it does seem that ol’ Chris may still want to go to real confession to think about how he sickly worships Father McCain and Dark Priest Giuliani.

Perhaps on the next season of the mainstream media’s America’s Next Top Confessor we will witness the episodic confessions of the Iraq War, and the American lives lost, for which NO ONE seems to take responsibility.

Presidential Power Rankings (Part 2)

Weekly Wednesday Presidential Politics - 1/16/07


First, feel free to quench your thirst for presidential politics over at my blog, Presidential Politics for America. Over there today I'm breaking down last night's Michigan results and there will be many more things to talk about leading up to Nevada and South Carolina, including an impending Republican brokered convention, Clinton and Obama on the same ticket (specifically how it's not going to happen), Edwards potential to choose the Democratic nominee, and much more.

Now, on to the conclusion of the Presidential Power Rankings, which began last Friday. Remember, these are the rankings for most likely to be the next President.


3. Hillary Clinton - I really don't like her chances in a general election, but she's got a 50/50 shot at being a nominee, and only one other person of either party can say that. If she somehow lucks into a contest against Huckabee or Romney, she should win the election when VP nominee Richardson brings over New Mexico and Florida and the rest of the electoral map stays the same.

In the Democratic nomination process, the Obama-Clinton duel is the definition of a toss up. Clinton currently holds solid leads in national polls, but it'll be a close race in Nevada this Saturday, which gives Obama more credibility. Then Obama will win South Carolina to further dig into Clinton's national lead which Senator Obama has been softening since the end of December.

When it comes time for Super Tuesday, Obama will have a small lead in the delegate count. The national polls will then be about as reliable the infamous New Hampshire polls, meaning either one has a legit shot at coming out on top, and in the unlikely event that one of them dominates (note: this domination could only be from Clinton and her strength in NY, NJ, and California), the race is alive at least until March 4th.

2. John McCain - Last night's Michigan loss was disappointing, but by no means backbreaking. Simply, a Michigan win would have put McCain in position for a South Carolina win. Those two wins would have resulted in a runaway McCain nomination. All the second place finish means is that McCain's road to victory becomes a bit more difficult. South Carolina is a three-way race with Huckabee and Romney. The winner of that will be the leader heading into Super Tuesday, but as long as McCain doesn't finish at a distant third, he will remain the favorite.

Ultimately, McCain is the candidate that the Republican Party can rally around easiest. For eight years, he's been the third most visible face of the party, after President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. He's been at the front of a war that is still popular with Fox News and the party. He led a troop surge which has quelled violence. He has a record that is more conservative than many think, though isolated maverick forays like McCain-Feingold have always been a trademark considered undesirable in the Republican Party.

In a general election, John McCain is the favorite over Hillary Clinton. With Republicans coming out in full force to vote against Clinton, the Democratic ire of the last five years will be negated and they'll break even with voters registered with one of the two parties. Then it becomes a battle for the center, and Independents love McCain, while Clinton's unfavorables among non-Democrats are notorious. With John Edwards' non-viability, there's only one candidate from the Democratic Party that can compete against McCain in a general election.

1. Barack Obama - The 2008 general election will be won in the middle, in between the trenches. No candidate since Clinton appeals to the moderates of this country like Barack Obama does now. His continuing rhetoric about making America whole again appeals to every Independent and moderate who could not bring themselves to join the bitter partisanship that has developed in this country since the 1994 Republican revolution. Obama has untapped potential to attract moderate and young voters, meaning he could defeat almost any Republican that the GOP nominates.

Almost.

Only two things stand in the way of Senator Obama getting the chance to transform the nation from the Oval Office: the two people above him on this list. Enough has been written about the Clinton-Obama duel. What could shape up to be a very interesting general election is Obama vs. McCain. It's hope vs. reality. Rhetoric vs. straight talk. Liberal vs. conservative. Domestic agenda vs. foreign policy. It's the yin vs. yang of America, and you couldn't pick two better candidates to represent the balance and articulate their side. Moreover, they are the two candidates that most appeal to the center. The two candidates have the integrity to only speak to the issues and have a great debate about the direction this country needs to go.

There's a lot to look forward to and a lot still left to analyze, but no matter the results, we're in for a treat.

Coffee, Wine and Dems.

Mainstream Media Patrol: Coffee, Wine, and Dems.

Oh no! Not again! One of the most annoying MSM narratives from the ’04 election was the myth that read something like this: the reason Democrats, including John Kerry, lose elections has to do with their choice of coffee—Starbucks—and their choice of wine: white—Chablis or Chardonnay. In other words, Dems. are educated snobs, elitists, Volvo-driving L-I-B-E-R-A-L-S—or at least that’s what the MSM would like to emphasize in its framing of things.

In a week when McCain and Clinton resurrect from the dead, in a week when Mean Girl Dowd unearthed her disdain for a first lady who kept her man, the Mainstream Media excavated what? Election 2004 narrative flashback: Coffee, Wine, and Dems. And I thought this was an election about ch-ch-ch-changes.

As the other ’08 MSM narrative threads seem to diminish, I’ve smelled something familiar this way come from the pundit class. They’ve rolled out a twice told tale, and here’s how they are re-packaging it: Obama has the college crowd, the elites, the Starbucks drinkers, the snobs; and conversely—yeah, whatever, Hillary has the uneducated, the poor, working class, the Maxwell House drinkers—I suppose, the common folks. Even dark angel Karl Rove described Hillary’s win in New Hampshire in terms of how she captured “beer drinkers.”

Sure, data from exit polling reveals how candidates perform in certain demographics. Campaigns use this information to strategize accordingly. Nonetheless, it’s fascinating how the MSM frames and labels Democratic blocks of voters in such drastic, polarizing terms: “Starbucks drinkers,” “White wine snobs,” “cafeteria Catholics,” “Volvo drivers,” “elitists,” etc. Whereas the MSM framing of Republican voters—“evangelicals,” “values voters,” “suburban, strip mall folks,” “church-going”—seems far less drastic.

We all know people who drink Starbucks and who prefer white wine—hopefully, not Chablis. Some people who fall into these categories may be Democrats; some may not. At a time when the themes of change and unity dominate the political stories in the mainstream media, it’s unfortunate to see an old, manufactured myth re-awaken from the dead.

It's Kristol Clear

It’s Kristol Clear

Just when I was ready to build a bridge; just when I imagined that the days of partisan politics might be over—indulge me for a minute!; just when I wanted to pat myself on the back for not foaming at the mouth over a new columnist at The New York Times, Neocon Sith Lord Bill Kristol f*cking shatters all hope.

Lord Billy made his debut today. Beginning his column by thanking Senator Barack Obama for preventing the possibility of another Clinton presidency, Billy Boy then goes on to insult the good Senator from Illinois: Kristol criticizes Barack for being a “liberal” Democrat—as opposed, I suppose, to a Judas Joe Lieberman Democrat—whom the Neocons fancy; Sith Bill says that Obama will “increase the scope of Nanny state”; and then Bill Pistol implies that Obama will not appoint the likes of Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court—Thank the Jedi Yoda, for the force’s sake.

Wait, it gets better: Sith Bill then invokes…Troll Michelle Malkin—who oddly resembles a glammed-up ewok from time to time—for expert testimony in Kristol’s overall argument: to make the case for conservative Mike Huckabee as the GOP candidate who could beat Barack Obama should there be an ’08 election of change.

It’s Kristol clear that The New York Times, with William Safire long retired from the column page and David Brooks as the lone conservative remaining, wanted more balance. It’s just unclear why out of all the conservative intellectuals out there—and there are many, many respectable ones, they would disturb the force by making Sith Kristol a regular.