July 6, 2007

Each year, it seems, the Grand American Puppet Show is getting longer, and the assortment of characters more diverse and talented. This time the curtain was lifted in the middle of 2006, more than two years before the Grand American Puppet Choice Day--er, excuse me, Election Day. The first two characters to appear on stage were New York Senator Hillary Clinton, representing the Democratic Party, and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, representing the Republican Party.  

The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal, as well as the Wild Wild Left, the Peace Tree, Independent Bloggers Alliance and Worldwide Sawdust.

Since returning from work today my inbox has been flooded with people either venting about Edwards dropping out, praising his campaign or wondering what if anything I have to say. Viscerally, I'm despondent about his leaving. Even if Edwards wasn't likely to prevail he set the pace on the issues debate. Edwards was far ahead of candidates in both parties on healthcare, poverty, the plight of the working poor, the phony global war on terror and global warming.

John Edwards is a champion of progressive values. Only a progressive mandate can facilitate the massive modernization our infrastructure needs, implement an exponential upgrade of public education to ensure the future, nurture a commitment to research and development for cleaner energy, reorient the economy so it values work over gentrified wealth, empower unions so wage earners will have more leverage, reform a justice system that supports a prison industrial complex by disproportionately incarcerating young black men and challenge America's empire culture so we're no longer at odds with the civilized world.

It's amazing how a presidential candidate coming from 20-30 points behind in all the polls, being up against two of the most popular figures in our nation's history, can end up getting within the margin of error or even beat those two historical figures, in a primary or caucus; but he's done it.  Barack Obama not only won in South Carolina, he won by a wide margin, something like 27 points.  He won in large part because of getting 81% of the black votes (male and female), but he also got a health three way share of the white men/women, all age voters.  In other words, he slaughtered Bill and Hillary Clinton in their (own) territory.

It's amazing how a presidential candidate coming from 20-30 points behind in all the polls, being up against two of the most popular figures in our nation's history, can end up getting within the margin of error or even beat those two historical figures, in a primary or caucus; but he's done it.  Barack Obama not only won in South Carolina, he won by a wide margin, something like 27 points.  He won in large part because of getting 81% of the black votes (male and female), but he also got a health three way share of the white men/women, all age voters.  In other words, he slaughtered Bill and Hillary Clinton in their (own) territory.

The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal, as well as the Wild Wild Left, the Independent Bloggers Alliance, the Peace Tree and Worldwide Sawdust.

Anybody out there ever watch the Family Guy cartoon on the American Goebell's Network otherwise known as FOX? The only reason to watch FOX is for cartoons such as The Simpsons or The Family Guy. How ironic FOX airs cartoons with satirical commentary about America's conservative culture.

Anyway, some years ago, an episode of the Family Guy showed imbecile father/husband Peter Griffin watching Star Trek on television. In typical Peter fashion he observed, "Holy crap!  Lt. Uhura is black!" Adding to the humor was how Peter watched Star Trek regularly and only realized Uhura was black that very moment.

Watching news coverage of this year's presidential campaign I feel like everyone from corporate media executives, field reporters and the Clintons have declared: "Holy crap! Barack Obama is black!"

The topic below was originally published in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal as well as The Wild Wild Left, Independent Bloggers Alliance, the Peace Tree and Worldwide Sawdust.

My immediate response to Saturday's results in South Carolina and Nevada are jaded despair. None of the candidates in either party, including my preferred candidate John Edwards, inspires my confidence about the future. Even worse, my preferred candidate with the most progressive message didn't even garner five percent of the vote in a heavily unionized state.

Overall, too many figures in the corporatist media, as well as bloggers, are consumed by the "horserace." The focus has been on Hillary Clinton's tears, Barack Obama's platitudes, John Edward's hair or John McCain's so-called "authenticity." There was also the silly hair splitting about who said what in the Clinton and Obama camps over race or inspid attention on Obama's statements about his disorganized desk. What the hell is wrong with all you people out there? Why are people so incapable of focusing on the salient challenges of our time and demanding answers from the declared candidates about why their ideas are best? Sad to say, today's candidates don't measure up to previous presidents.

Want change?  Don't we all.  Each of the Democratic Presidential candidates has plans for change, with varying ideas on how they'd go about it.  For the most part, the top three candidates use similar rhetoric, with Barack Obama presenting the most inspirational picture, Hillary Clinton suggesting notions based on her extensive experience, and John Edwards detailing the most explicit plans for recovering from the Bush legacy.  

We want change, that's a given.  But if Democrats, Independents & progressives want to win the 2008 presidency and, more importantly, achieve a landslide takeover of Congress, Democrats need a candidate that can beat anyone the GOP comes up.  In addition to being able to win, our candidate needs to be one who won't stir up the vindictive passions of conservatives.  Why?  Because conservatives are in the minority, yet they continually out-vote progressives when they're angry, fearful or spiteful.  Even with the ongoing Iraq quagmire and recent lying, cheating and stealing firmly tied to the Bush Administration and its policies (CIA outing, war profiteering and record oil profits), the Democrats' showing at the polls is dismal.  The left simply doesn't use its majority political clout to ensure the country is run the way we want it to be run.

Next year there is more at stake than just the presidency.  We have a potentially historic opportunity to take back the Senate.  The conservative movement is faltering.  We need to be careful not to reinvigorate it with a bad choice in the Democratic primary.  Remember Barry Goldwater?  The people who voted for his losing presidential bid did so as if it were some kind of badge of honor.  At least two of our current candidates in the Democratic pool could inspire that type of spiteful, negative voting again next fall, which would result in a lost opportunity to elect new Democrats in Congress as well.  If progressives want to enact real change in Congress and take our government back, we need to face up to reality before our wishful thinking sets us up for failure next fall.

Hillary Clinton is the GOP's best Get Out The Vote strategy in 2008.  Obama's a close second.

We can get mad about what elected Republicans have done to our country in the past six years and vote in the Democratic Primary for any candidate who says they'll do things differently.  Or, we could proactively determine how the election is likely to go next year if our candidate is easily portrayed to "Middle America" as the worse thing that could happen to our country.  

Want change?  Don't we all.  Each of the Democratic Presidential candidates has plans for change, with varying ideas on how they'd go about it.  For the most part, the top three candidates use similar rhetoric, with Barack Obama presenting the most inspirational picture, Hillary Clinton suggesting notions based on her extensive experience, and John Edwards detailing the most explicit plans for recovering from the Bush legacy.  

We want change, that's a given.  But if Democrats, Independents & progressives want to win the 2008 presidency and, more importantly, achieve a landslide takeover of Congress, Democrats need a candidate that can beat anyone the GOP comes up.  In addition to being able to win, our candidate needs to be one who won't stir up the vindictive passions of conservatives.  Why?  Because conservatives are in the minority, yet they continually out-vote progressives when they're angry, fearful or spiteful.  Even with the ongoing Iraq quagmire and recent lying, cheating and stealing firmly tied to the Bush Administration and its policies (CIA outing, war profiteering and record oil profits), the Democrats' showing at the polls is dismal.  The left simply doesn't use its majority political clout to ensure the country is run the way we want it to be run.
Next year there is more at stake than just the presidency.  We have a potentially historic opportunity to take back the Senate.  The conservative movement is faltering.  We need to be careful not to reinvigorate it with a bad choice in the Democratic primary.  Remember Barry Goldwater?  The people who voted for his losing presidential bid did so as if it were some kind of badge of honor.  At least two of our current candidates in the Democratic pool could inspire that type of spiteful, negative voting again next fall, which would result in a lost opportunity to elect new Democrats in Congress as well.  If progressives want to enact real change in Congress and take our government back, we need to face up to reality before our wishful thinking sets us up for failure next fall.

Hillary Clinton is the GOP's best Get Out The Vote strategy in 2008.  Obama's a close second.

We can get mad about what elected Republicans have done to our country in the past seven years and vote in the Democratic Primary for any candidate who says they'll do things differently.  Or, we could proactively determine how the election is likely to go next year if our candidate is easily portrayed to "Middle America" as the worse thing that could happen to our country.  

The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal, as well as the Independent Bloggers Alliance, the Peace Tree, Wild Wild Left and Worldwide Sawdust.

Warning, this is a long post. It's long because supporting a presidential candidate for me is deeply personal. It's not simply deciding which candidate I will pull the lever for in the privacy of a voting booth. Rather I approach the decision as an activist and ask myself: after weighing all the virtues and flaws of the declared candidates on whose behalf am I willing to devote my free time?

In my darker moments I'll ask myself, "Do any of these lying corporatist whores deserve my support? Why bother with any of them?" The ship has long sailed on my days of being a "true believer."

Dear voter (in an early voting state), I hear 1 of 5 of you are pushing off until the last moment making your mind up who to favor in the race for the Democratic nominee.  If it's true, then the outcomes in NH and Nevada are not known yet. So I will be bold and ask you,

please, please pick us a winner who will pull through the one moment that will matter most, next November.

Realize, as a primary voter, that the race for Prez in '08 will be like no other — YouTube candid camera replays, viral emails, cellphone mass messaging, voter roll purging (inspired by the US Dept of Justice, no less), and reasoned, provocative debate all in equal parts.

With all of that in play, we can't this time afford to seek a standardbearer who will draw just 51% or 52% of the national vote, tops. To prevail in the fall, we must assure a decisive win. Eking out a 51% majority won't cut it.            

We'll need a near landslide.

Cross-posted at   deariowaAndnewhampshire.com

Dear voter, I hear 1 of 5 of you are pushing off until the last moment  making your mind up  who to favor in the race for the Democratic nominee.  If it's true, then the outcome in your early state is not known yet. So I will be bold and ask you,

please, please pick us a winner who will pull through the one moment that will matter most, next November.

Realize, as a primary voter, that the race for Prez in '08 will be like no other — YouTube candid camera replays, cellphone mass messaging, voter roll purging (inspired by the US Dept of Justice, no less), and reasoned, provocative debate all in equal parts.

With all of that in play, we can't this time afford to seek a standardbearer who will draw just  51% or 52% of the national vote, tops. To prevail  next fall, we'll need to assure a decisive victory. Eking out a 51% win won't cut it.            

We'll need a near landslide.            
  Cross-posted at deariowaAndnewhampshire.com

Hillary Clinton is the GOP's best Get Out the Vote strategy in 2008.  
If Democrats, Independents & progressives want to win the 2008 presidency and, more importantly, achieve a landslide takeover of Congress, Democrats need a presidential team that won't stir up the vindictive passions of conservatives.  Why?  Because conservatives are in the minoity, yet they out-vote progressives when they're angry, fearful or spiteful.  Even with the Iraq quagmire and lying, cheating and stealing (CIA outing, war profiteering and record oil profits) firmly tied to the Bush Administration and its policies, the Democrats' showing at the polls is dismal. The left simply doesn't use its majority political clout to ensure the country is run the way we want it to be run.  
Next year there is more at stake than just the presidency.  We have a potentially historic opportunity to take back the Senate.  The conservative movement is faltering.  We need to be careful not to reinvigorate it with a bad choice in the Democratic primary.  Remember Barry Goldwater?  The people who voted for his losing presidential bid did so as if it were a badge of honor.  Some of our candidates in the Democratic pool could inspire that type of spiteful, negative voting again next fall, which would result in a lost opportunity to elect new Democrats in Congress as well.  If progressives want to enact change in Congress and take our government back, we need to face up to reality before our wishful thinking sets us up for failure next fall.

Debate Schedule
July 23, 2007 - Charleston, South Carolina (CNN/YouTube)
August 19, 2007 - Des Moines, Iowa
September 26, 2007 - Hanover, New Hampshire
October 30, 2007 - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
November 15, 2007 - Las Vegas, Nevada
December 10, 2007 - Los Angeles, California
January 6, 2008 - Johnson County, Iowa
January 15, 2008 - Las Vegas, Nevada
January 31, 2008 - California

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly....

Let's Go....

The Sun

Former Sen. John Edwards, left, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama during the Democratic presidential primary debate in Manchester, N.H., June 3, 2007.

I sort of watched last night's debate, when the bloviation reached the painfully embarrassing level I would switch channels in favor of a program about the physics of the Sun, about which it may not be possible to bloviate.

Switching back and forth between those two particular shows created a kind of auditory strobe effect, in one moment the undeniable reality of the physical processes taking place on the Sun, in the next the equally undeniable bullshit taking place in a suburb of our solar system known as New Hampshire.

One self serving statement followed another, charges of timidity and lack of leadership leveled by Edwards against Clinton and Obama, charges of being 41/2 years late with leadership leveled against Edwards by Obama.

I had just returned from the Sun when those barbs were hurled and it struck me that it was possible that no one on the stage possessed the ability to lead a rifle squad down the street to buy a newspaper.

They all had their moments I suppose but during one orbit I heard Clinton say:

"The differences among us are minor, the differences between us and the Republicans are major. And I don't want anybody in America to be confused."

From "Democrats Focus on Iraq In Contentious Second Debate" by  Anne Kornblut and Dan Balz at The Washington Post

That was a bit of truth because, although I might have to hold my nose to vote for her and others on the stage last night, I am not capable of the kind of confusion that would lead me to vote Republican.

In her truthiness however, Ms Clinton neglected to mention the incredible similarities between the Democrats and the Republicans in their insatiable eagerness to sell out to the highest corporate bidder.

Iraq and health care seemed to take up most of the debate and I don't remember hearing a word about campaign and ethics reform, no mention of the lizards of K Street and their influence in preventing the delivery of Health care and prescription drugs as well as their influence in going to war and prolonging it.

To be fair though, it may have come up while I was eight light minutes away.

The 4th Annual DemocracyFest in New Hampshire is approaching! At this posting, only 128 weekend tickets are left for sale!

http://www.democracyfest.ne t/

Bring someone you care about, and meet new people. It’s time to take our country back.

End the Iraq occupation. Build respect in the world again. Protect our lives and liberties at home. Provide real (economic) security for our families. It’s our country, and we need to leave it in better shape for our children and their children.