Craig, Agree with you fair assessment of retail politics.
however, as a member of the "YES WE CAN" supporters. Obama's campaign slogan means much more than getting a bunch of Borg to lock step in a 1984 vision towards our candidate.....the same with Clinton's supporters I suspect.
Have to admit I will be glad when we get past March 4 so that one way or they other, the political folks have to come up with a new spiel. The current ones are getting mighty boring.
Matt Taibbi on Macenstein: (excerpt from my link above)
Back in 1999, McCain concluded a speech at Phillips Exeter in New Hampshire by shouting, "Never again do we send our men and women to fight and die in foreign conflicts unless our goal is victory!" Which is interesting, because that is exactly — almost word for motherfucking word — how McCain ended his latest speeches on the campaign trail in Maryland and Virginia. In other words, John McCain knew his answer to the Iraq War mess before it even happened. For good measure, he insisted that "only military men like General Petraeus" have the right to say when soldiers will come home from Iraq — not, he added with a sneer, "some civilian running for president." Nor, presumably, America's civilian population, which is being asked to send its sons and daughters to kill and die in a faraway country.
Craig..... great video.....
I've taken more than a few classes on retail sales..... and I employ the tactics that you mentioned used by both Clinton and Obama when I do a crafts fair.....
hey..... they work....
as for March 4th..... I have the same plan I mentioned the other day for March 5th...... hot tubbin'......
my goal this year is to come back from this ski vacation looking like a prune.....
Haven't read last night's thread yet, but in case anyone missed this...like the entire world...Nader picked a Veep...not that it matters.
"The Texas-born Gonzalez ran for mayor of San Francisco as a Green Party candidate in 2003 but lost to Democrat Gavin Newsom after a surprisingly close runoff election. Gonzalez has been largely inactive in city politics since then, though he has recently gone after both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a man he says lacks the ability to bring about real change."
I do hope that Ms Clinton gets to stay in this for a little longer so we have more time to shop around. It would be horrible if we lose this opportunity and then have buyer's remorse.
We certainly need more time to get to know Mr. Obama. I think he is still a little too unknown.
I think the bi-partisanship of the people here is damaging this blog. You know what I mean! Last night , Dog was the first to post on the thread and she posted "Go Obama!" What happened to the days when people just said "Woo!"? I'm just waiting for the day when McCain supporters come here and get called "McCainiacs!" I remember the slogan that said "I gave up hope and it worked just fine." About Obama and his pledge to meet with certain world leaders without any conditions. Bush obviously feels that would be terribly wrong to do. My guess is that Obama would put his trust in these other world leaders , but Bush doesn't trust some of these world leaders. If we don't trust these other world leaders , then how are they ever gonna become trustworthy? Besides , how may people here actually trust our country's leader? I guess my hangup is that Obama speaks in such a way that he makes everything sound like it would be easy to do. End the war quickly , talk to Raul Castro etc....I just can't see things being as easy as he's making them sound. In closing , I enjoyed the video Craig. How much do you want for the swamp land?
Another group of brain cells seem to have gone on vacation. What is the name of that folk group Craig likes so much. I keep tapping on that synapse and it burps up the play title "Speed the Plow" and I know that's wrong. Help.
On MoJo, I see that they were quoting a black superdelegate as saying that black superdelegates are being target with threats, intimidation and charges of being Uncle Toms if they don't commit to casting their vote for Obama. I guess this had to happen. I'm so glad Obama is not viewed as the black candidate and race is not a factor. To be fair, I'm not saying Obama is behind the pressure, although I do recall at least some of the Ombama supporters here claiming Hillary's campaign was behind every move they felt was offensive to Obama that her supporters made in the runup to the primaries, so applying their logic, I guess the Obama campaign must be behind this.
Damn, Mike Smith - Dave Clark 5 lead sinder is dead.
And for the morning's economic news - the Dow is down more than 100 and bernanke thinks everything is AOK. I feel so much better knowing that all those gloomy economic reports don't mean the economy is in bad shape.
Alpha, In your long piece yesterday evening (10:23) in which said us white folk are completely out of touch with the black community and that we just don't get the movement, how about doing this.
_Not_ from what Sen Obama is saying, but from how black people are processing the total message, what _exactly_ does the under-40 cohort believe Obama is going to do when elected? Please be specific.
Is the treatment of the black community going to be different from that of the white community? If so, in what ways?
What happens in integrated communities? If fundamental changes are to be made, does it mean that efforts at integration were wasted effort?
I did the "Leap Day" bit on the blog today with references to both the ancient Roman tradition and a tip of the hat to Al Capp even though he put Sadie Hawkins day in November. At least that produced two fun songs from You Tube
Mr.Crawford you are right once again. that were more people your business willing to tell it straight as you do, voters of this country It would be able to make decisions based on what is real.
Well, I have to run do some errands, and have much to do today - may check in briefly later this a.m., but who knows. Renee, good luck on that shrivelling if I don't get a chance to chat before you hit the H2O.
Corey: noted your 8:05 comment, and shall abide by your suggestion. But first another heresy, and then I shall behave for the day.
Reposting in entirety Alpha1906's comment from last night on political generational change in the African American community. It was too incisive to be lost in midst of a boring and quarrelsome thread.
============
From alpha:
You guys are SO clueless when it comes to black politics. The members of the Congressional Black Caucus are as divided as the rest of the Democratic Party. However, when they decided to back Hillary Cllinton, they made that decision thinking that they had enough clout and sway to bring their voters over to her column. However, the African American electorate is very different than what it used to be.
This is the post Civil Right generation. We're the ones who got up at the crack of dawn to go to integrated schools, live in integrated neighborhoods, while still maintaining our cultural connections. We don't walk lockstep with black leadership because we've been taught to QUESTION leadership. Also, 25 million of the 39 million African Americans in this country are 40 or younger. These African Americans understand politics, understand their own interests, and are HYPER aware of white liberal Democratic politicians promising the sky and delivering asphalt.
So when black CBC members decided to back Clinton, they showed that they were out of touch with their own constituents. With an average of eight out of ten African Americans voting for Obama, suddenly these CBC members saw their own futures in jeopardy. I don't buy all of these death threat claims. I DO buy the notion that for the first time in a LONG time, many of these representatives were challenged, and many like Stephanie Tubbs Jones, weren't used to it. These people suddenly had to stand up and be accountable to their community and state why they were going against their voters.
What you're seeing is a classic case of a generation outlasting their stay. Stale ideas. Not addressing many issues of interest to younger African American voters, like schools and the environment. And now, they're going to be challenged by younger black politicians.
BTW, you guys also fail to understand how pissed Clinton made younger African Americans. There's always been more hype about Clinton's connection to black people than the actual connection felt by the black community. He was always viewed favorably in CONTRAST to other presidents. He would do things like learn the lyrics of the Negro National Anthem, or have the right tone when talking to black people about issues. But when it came to actual policy, there's still a bunch of resentment in the community over a number of issues: Welfare reform, his tepid support of Affirmative Action, the absolutely useless Racial Commission that failed to deal with the effects of slavery, the "non apology" apology for slavery, his complete ignoring of Rwanda versus US action in the former Yugoslavia, Sister Souljah, etc.
But he really did believe, and a lot of the CBC members cozy with him let him believe, that he really was the first black president. But when the black electorate didn't think so, he threw a fit. One of the least reported on interviews that codified the black vote against Clinton was an interview he did on The Tom Joyner Show, which is the most popular syndicated radio show in this country. It was so "how dare you not do what I say" to the black community, that for weeks, listeners bombarded Tom Joyner (and Tavis Smiley who comments on the show) with protests.
Today, the John Lewis of the world understand that their world has turned upside down. Suddenly, being loyal to the King and Queen is less politically expedient than joining the rebels. Barack and his generation of African Americans are the rebels. The CBC members who back Clinton are free to do so, but they know that every political decision has a political cost and benefit. John Lewis figured his out faster than most.
"When last we convened on this story, the entire traditional media, cable outfits like CNN, and Obama blogs across the spectrum, were all in the tank for Obama. They had collectively pronounced untrue the story CTV had reported about Mr. Obama's campaign aide(s) (senior staff, worker bees or whatever title you want to include so as to incorporate all possible people that could have participated in this story) tipping the Canadian government that Obama's campaign rhetoric on NAFTA was all hot air. Not to worry, Obama's aide(s) said, whatever Obama is saying in Ohio about revisiting NAFTA, it won't apply in his presidency.
Obama's campaign issued a statement declaring "inaccuracies," while Obama himself said during a plane press gaggle (likely the same one referenced below) that the Canadian government had denied it happened. He really meant embassy spokesperson, but let's not quibble on a smoke screen. Meanwhile, the embassy statement declared there was no story. None. Translation: go away you silly media, there's nothing here. Thus, like good little lambs, the media and all those studious Obama bloggers went away. They're so obedient.
NAFTA story, developing... into something that could be a problem for Mr. Obama. Once again, it's about a lot more than NAFTA. It's the measure of the man's character that comes into question. Saying one thing in public to the American people in order to to get vote, then promising a neighboring government something else. It's anything but a new kind of politics."
I'm having a ball building my Pandora stations. Got three going now: The Piano Bar for evenings here with wine and conversation once the &(&%%%^)** election is through and one for folk, country, and bluegrass. Once those are done, I'll tackle Rock and Classical stations ... Eclectic R Us.
And speaking of "fun" , they have proposed making next Friday "Hawaiian shirt / Tie Dye shirt" day at work. It's supposed to be something to chase away the winter blues. So I guess people will either be walking around work looking like "party animals" or "Deadheads". By the way , the weather sucks here this morning. Snowing hard here for the past few hours.
"Sources at the highest levels of the Canadian government — who first told CTV that a call was made from the Obama camp — have reconfirmed their position. "
Sheila wrote: "Obama's campaign slogan means much more than getting a bunch of Borg to lock step in a 1984 vision towards our candidate.....the same with Clinton's supporters I suspect."
Well good thing for Clinton supporters we've got more than a campaign slogan to plop our money down on. And those discriminating buyers on the Clinton side like to look under the hood and kick the tires-we're not easily impressed by a fancy paint job.
Alpha -- Your comments from last night were well-thought and no doubt right, for the most part. But I don't think you can or should be sneering at people like Maxine Waters (to name one) as being out of touch. She is a great voice for education as well as for the black community AND woman.
I do agree that the so-called welfare reform was a very bad piece of legislation. At the time, I emailed every Tennessee rep in the house and senate and asked: "What about child care?"
And yes, I also agree that the Democrats have taken the black vote for granted. Just like Obama and Co. is now taking the baby boomer female vote for granted.
I repeat the question Flatus asked....what do you specifically see that Obama will do for your generation? And if he doesn't do much, how will that affect the young black voter? I know, for example, that my candidate will make women's issues a priority. She will protect women's right to choose, for one thing. Whereas Barack is on record as saying that women have the right to have "some control over their bodies." The word "some" jumped out and smacked me in the face. And I will say that I've started to see younger women show up on feminist blogs saying, "Until this campaign I didn't understand that this is still a VERY sexist society."
However, the basic problem with what you said, and I see this in the women's movement, too. Your generation ignores how and why you caught some breaks.
You wrote: "What you're seeing is a classic case of a generation outlasting their stay. Stale ideas."
Wow. Would you say that to Maxine Waters' or John Lewis' faces? I gotta believe that if she were around, Barbara Jordan would take you to the woodshed for that one.
Prince Harry pulled out from Afghanistan in wake of disclosure by Drudge report and "obscure Australian magazine." (So obscure has anyone seen Aussie pub name in a story?)
Yesterday's story would have been a great opportunity for some enterprising cable channel with hours to fill to work up a little story on what the Bush daughters are doing to assist in Iraq and Afghanistan; Iraq being their dad's very own splendid little war.
My first though on the first read through on Alpha's post made me think "serpent's tooth". An elderly man who had been bullied, bruised, and bloodied so that they could have that integrated life was being shoved out of the way as being unnecessary and told to betray the friendship of a lifetime unless he didn't wait one week to move his one vote.
It's all well and good for Joshua to stand on the shoulders of Moses ... they don't need to stomp him into the ground while they do it.
Patsi to Alpha: " I gotta believe that if she were around, Barbara Jordan would take you to the woodshed for that one."
Nah. She'd be too busy out campaigning for Obama.
=======
Jamie: I saw the video on John Lewis, and it's clear he is caught in crosshairs of his personal and deep affection/admiration for the Clintons and his constituents' views.
Once again, he is a leader in expressing that divide and not ignoring it.
He is aware in his bones, however, that 43 years after that dangerous march in Selma a young black man is in serious contention for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Sad fate for him that that young political star is up against Lewis's dear friend and ally of many decades.
"With Sen. Barack Obama now emerging as the Democratic front-runner, clear signs suggest that his press treatment will soon change and that the media will fall back into their routine of viewing -- and critiquing -- leading Democrats through the eyes of Republican spin.
Just last week, we saw how a single line from a Michelle Obama speech was seized upon by conservative partisans, led by Fox News, to suggest she is not patriotic, and how that attack was given a wider airing in the mainstream press. "
Yes, dog -- it would be a good time to question what the twins and a LOT of young Repubs are doing during this war. Like Cheney during Vietnam, they all seem to have other priorities. But on cable news at least, whenever that is brought up, the commentators heap scorn on the whole notion.
It was more Alpha's comment on it that upset me. That kicked to the curb, out of the way old dog. One more week would have killed them?
You are right that the Democratic party took the black vote for granted and gave darn little other than an open door they could try to make the most of in exchange for that support. I just think they could have found a better young hero to follow to the Promised Land, though I have to admit he is good at promising.
Speaking of race relations , a woman I am friends with at work has an ex-brother-in-law who is the lead singer and guitarist in a blues band. He is white. The other two guys in his band are black. Last year , they played in a bluesfest show in the Muskegon , Mi. area. One of the black men in the band invited his black friends from work to come see their show. For the next week after their show this black man's friends did not want to speak with him at all. Why? Because he had a white guy in his band.
Jamie: I don't see the kicked to the curb old dog that you do. I see a lion in his late years, beset by a change he did not see coming. In this case, it is not a bad change at all -- it's a group of young leaders fresh and ready to get in there and solve some problems, some of which they define differently than their elders.
It would be worse if that were NOT happening.
And this is not the African plain. Rep. Lewis is safe and fed and listened to plenty, and has lots more to say.
"Nah. She'd be too busy out campaigning for Obama. "
dog's -- She might well be on his team. Or not. And which ever candidate she backed, whoa-be-unto the fool who tried to mug her for it. One thing though, I'd put money down that Barbara Jordan would have demanded time on Matthews or one of the shows that were so blatently sexist to have her say. And if you get chills listening to Obama....you should have heard Barbara.
Ya know, it is what it is. I don't begrudge the Obama supporters for pressuring the superdelegates they think they can in order to make sure the messiah is nominated - and as I've said in the past I'll vote for him if he's the nominee - actually, it will be a grudging vote against McCain, but the effect is the same. I do begrudge the Obama camp for not acknowledging that their supporters have turned to playing the race card (and I HATE that expression, but it does convey what I think I see happening.)
But do I blame then for playing it? No I don't. Loyalty to old friends who have worked on your behalf in the past may not move whatever you perceive as your agenda, whether it be to stay in office or to advance policies that benefit you or whatever, and this is, after all, politics. I'm sure that many blacks see Obama as having more interest in addressing problems that affect many of the disadvantaged in their ethnic group - although I haven't heard that articulated and haven't heard how he plans to do that - and if so,they should support Obama and put pressure on their representatives to vote for him in their superdeegate role. Of course a line is drawn through this process, and it is a line that may come back as providing the ability for Obama to gain thenomination, and perhaps even the office, but may prevent him from being able to gather sufficient support for his agenda togovern effectrively. Then again, it may not.
But I have to say that it is discouraging to hear the same rhetoric I heard in the 60s and 70s about black leaders betraying their people and being Uncle Toms if they don't vote for Obama no matter what their own beliefs may be, but I guess we haven't gotten past the racial divides that have existed since the days of reconstruction, and it is deeply disappointing to see that. But maybe this is just paleo racial politics since I obviously don't get it, as Alpha has pointed out.
Thanks, Craig. Obama has perpetuated one of the biggest frauds in election history and the media aren't paying attention.
Hillary's campaign has definitely made mistakes and has not been nimble enough but the media has never concentrated on the beef--for most of them (MSM and so-called progressive blogs) it's been a Hillary-bashing, Obama-worshipping dog fight and the American people haven't figured it out.
In a ceremony that received virtually no attention in the American media, the United States and Canada signed a military agreement Feb. 14 allowing the armed forces from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even one that does not involve a cross-border crisis.
If you think NAFTA is bad than what do you think about having Canadian Troops on our streets if the American Citizens rise up against our Government when Martial Law is enacted?
Could they be used if Der Fuhrer starts another war before the elections in November? Would you be willing to submit to foreign troops on our soil shooting American Citizens who will be labeled Enemy Combatants by Der Fuhrer Bush under the MCA of 2006 if we resist Martial Law?
You all better start thinking about this because it is a very real possibility this can occur.
pogo....
great post! what I see with this election process so far is classic human nature....
humans tend to gather round their own kind.... or tribe.... and yeah.... because of all our modern toys we think we've outgrown it..... but not so....
and no..... the younger generation will not change it either..... unless of course.... they aren't human..... ;)
well..... I'm off to my book club..... and off to packing for a much needed vacation....
Rick will be bringing along his laptop..... so I might surface a bit..... but then again.... I might just take a break from the machine.....
Washington Monthly: bears out what we are seeing in the comments section here: latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%), but Obama pulls more independents and GOP.
Remember: 2008 McCain is not your 2000 Straight Talking McCain. I would not bet those independents will gravitate to him as previously, because Obama is now the change candidate and McCain is swathed in Bush's reflected, uh, glory.
Just to keep you informed: The Right Wing has not given up on the Larry Sinclair story. It does appear that the polygraph exam was a set-up designed to discredit Sinclair --- very suspicious details. (There may have been a $750,000 payoff to WhiteHouse.com).
About race relations - I know zero African Americans. I did not avoid them, I just have never had an opportunity to develop a friendship with anyone of that race. I have lived all over this country, I have met almost every other race and religion. So I have no first hand knowledge of anything about being black in America in 2008.
It is really interesting to watch all these racial issues being discussed.
Patsi- Your comment about Barbara Jordan clicked into my memory banks:
And if you get chills listening to Obama....you should have heard Barbara.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 9:50 AM
So right you are! I could almost hear her eloquent remarks delivered in her very distinct , melodic voice at the Nixon impeachment hearings as if it just occurred.
Thanks for bringing her up, lest we forget those who came before & fought to open doors for many others.
I'd like to believe that she would stand with Hillary today.
I did ask a question about that Ohio brochure put out by Senator Obama's campaign, but didn't receive an answer. It said there was a picture of him with his father with the caption about his parent's influence on his life. My question was father or stepfather. If it was his father rather than stepfather, then that is more of the bait and switch tactics that disturb me.
I'm looking forward to the conversation with Alpha simply because we will definitely be talking from two different generational viewpoints and she's on the west coast. If she's California, then there will be a whole lot of interesting perspective going on.
I have a bit of time, so let me try to consolidate some of the questions asked. Please excuse any spelling or grammatical errors.
Patsi et. al.,
The CBC members falling out of favor because of a disconnect with their voters is nothing unique to African American politics. It happens everywhere. But with black Congressional leaders, it's just a bit more stark when it happens.
When speaking about Maxine Waters, of all CBC members, I know her the best. For most of my life, she was my Congressional representative. And like most CBC reps, her focus is around traditional CBC issues (social services in her district) and national issues. That's fine and that's important. But when you've been unchallenged for your seat for decades, you tend to think that the ideas that may have been important when you were first elected, are still the same important issues five or six terms later.
So these CBC members don't recognize the issues when college educated African Americans who grew up in their districts, decide to come back and buy homes. What are those issues? Well, many of them are purchasing risky sub prime loans as a pathway to the middle class. Now a CBC member on the ball would recognize that hey, "maybe we should really, really make sure that we have oversight so that if things go belly up, our neighborhoods won't be devastated."
That gets the attention of young African American voters. They then take a look around their neighborhoods and begin asking questions. Why is their representative against vouchers, particularly when they are spending money to send their child to parochial schools because their neighborhood public schools have been and always will be crappy? Their representative may be tied to the teachers union because they need to get re-elected, but the African American voter says they're not willing to sacrifice their child's one time education for a CBC's re-election.
These African American voters then begin looking at food deserts (places where fresh fruits and vegetables are almost non existent) and begin wondering why their CBC rep hasn't fought for funds to create urban farmers markets? This black voter pays attention to things like the latest ag bill which allocated $30 mill for urban gardens. Did your CBC rep take part? Did they even recognize the problem?
So when you have year after year of CBC members not concentrating on the issues of TODAY rather than living off the works of YESTERDAY, then you get challenged. And if anyone has any doubt that these African American voters will look all of these CBC members dead in the eye and tell them that, including Waters, Lewis and yes, the late Barbara Jordan, then they missed what happened during this primary.
If this was a decade ago, Hillary would have picked all of the right CBC members to influence. But guess what? This year, those same CBC members not only were rejected but received enough blow back that they started having to answer for their own performance. Some CBC members recognized that early, like Rep. Clyburn. Others, like Charles Rangel, were and are tone deaf.
So the Civil Rights era CBC membership is about to be challenged and then passed. You'll start seeing more Duval Patricks, Cory Bookers, Barack Obamas, running for office. Funny, but you should start looking at this as moving beyond racial identity politics to something more complex. These new representatives will have forward ideas that are more geared toward issues that affect all Americans.
Very creative video especially on a Friday leap year day that won't exist next year. Now I understand why elections are held during leap years (I think there might be an exception to this...not understanding all celestial/calendar mathematics), one more day of politicking!
And where did you find that "pimpish" dude on Scam #3...David Shuster files?
"'African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened,' said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.)...'nasty letters, phone calls, threats they’ll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom.'"
A little follow-up to last nights discussion. Listening to POTUS08 and other programs this morning...it really angers me that they don't talk more about this or give voice to this. Someone said MSNBC did this morning...I missed that part and only saw the very end where Clayburn said they weren't being threatened...of course...he's a guilty party so of course he would say that.
"Rep. Diane E. Watson (D-Calif.), a black lawmaker and Clinton backer, said the intense lobbying for Obama would not alter her vote...'I’ve gotten threatening mail,' Watson said. ..But I don’t intimidate. I can hold the ground. … I would lose my seat over my principles.'"
One last thing before I hit the road. Jamie, you should get out of the thought process that these African American voters are looking for some sort of Messiah to lead them out of the desert. This idea that we're constantly on the lookout for the next MLK (or as Africans call it, The Big Chief Syndrome) is wrong.
In fact, one of the lessons this generation of younger African Americans learned is that there is no one leader and we don't need a Moses. So Barack isn't looked at in that way. He IS looked at as a representative of themselves: Educated, intelligent, on equal terms (or better) with white opponents, and very secure with who he is. In other words, the values the Civil Rights movement was supposed to create in an African American.
Dog posted: "latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%)"
This is great news - another reason people have been pointing to why Obama should be the candidate...electability has now also been dispelled.
He's not going to bring change to Washington because he's proven that he participates in old school dirty politics like the rest of them. So change is no longer a criteria.
He's not the only DEM leading over McCain in a general election. So electability is off the table.
So what other criteria do we have?
Oh...who is best prepared and has a detailed plan to move us forward out of the mess we're in...that would be Hillary. So obviously Hillary should be the democratic nominee.
alpha, between work,errands and hosting band practice for Li'l Pogo's band, I'm going to be in & out today and may miss you while you're on, but want to let you know that I appreciate your perspective and the thoughtfulness of your posts. You bring a perspective that in this transformational political season we aging boomers definitely need. Oh, and welcome to the daddy get the kid ready and to school club. I'm not much of a joiner, but that's one club I'm happy to have become a member of.
And mornin' Wendy! That was me that caught the Cleaver discussion on mojo and brought it up.
Having read Alter's 'Between the Lines,' I really didn't get his reasoning (I saw you had a reference to it on your video). If HRC, was more behind in delegates, I would see his point. I mean the same case could be made for BHO to step aside...it is that close. The media is playing-up 11 straight losses and ignoring California. I sure remember hearing that February would most likely be a 'winless" month for Hillary back in January. If the dem nomination were a "winner take all" primary/caucus like the repugs, I could see this. It will be interesting to see the results after March 4th. It isn't over yet, eventhough the media wants us to believe that. Maybe hate is stronger than love in the media. There is a fine line between hate and love and they are not opposites. The opposite of love/hate is apathy.
Do you follow the Right Wing? They are very good at Attack/Smear. I don't have all that much confidence in the voting public. After all, many have fallen for this Obama nonsense.
Scott Walterman on POTUS08 didn't even bring it up - put this - change is in the air spin on it w/o getting to the heart of what was really going on - threats and intimidation wrapped up with a pretty bow of change.
That said...I actually do appreciate alpha's POV on the issue of young black voters and think the last part of his post regarding young black voters not looking for a Moses was very interesting.
From what I've seen...it's the young white voters that need a Moses...so alpha may be right that the younger black voters are looking at things from a far more practical and progressive lens.
Another link for Craig on Republican logic. And the fact more Democrats have voted for Clinton so far adds to the picture.
Obama would like Democrats to believe that come November, those Republicans and Independents will vote blue over McCain. With new sanctions on Iran, warships off Lebanon, blood in Darfur, violence in Gaza, moderates in Pakistan signing deals with militants, Canadians rejecting NAFTA blasts, Chavez threatening neighbors, NATO limp in Afghanistan, McCain won't be looking so feeble. Add that to the media starting to examining the Obama stories and Democrats might be stunned over their candidate.
Or maybe we all will just believe.
Glad to see I was not the only one with long posts...LOL
Those are all interesting issues and since I know the city well, I can particularly understand the importance of the housing and access to quality stores within the area.
You may find it interesting that in 1944 my parents lived in Leimert Park. At the time it was middle class white but transitioned over to black by the 50s. I last visited the neighborhood in 1961, but at least got to see the beginnings of the art and jazz scene there. At the time I lived in Westchester which was a white area. That school has now become part of a multi racial middle class area. My father graduated from Fremont High School in 1934 and I attended school there during 1959. Again a story of transition from white to black with the generational shift as the school had become about 90% black and 10% mexican with whatever smidge of a percentage that could be carved off was me.
The whole point being that for a variety of reasons, I've always taken a multiplicity of racial influences for granted and in some ways deplore while understanding the almost harsh aura that the younger AA generation displays.
In thinking about this, I did a little surfing. You might find this web page dedicated to Leimert Park interesting. http://leimertpark.ning.com/
Oh all this talk about Hillary getting out of the race is being generated by the Obama campaign because their run is now coming to an end. Hillary is expected to win far more races than he in the coming up primaries and so going into the convention she'll look more like the frontrunner than he and the Obama camp is starting to worry. It's all about who is winning going into the convention.
Thought Clyburn's comments were very interesting this morning on MSNBC. He said superDs should not take 2nd place person and put them into first no matter who it is...UNLESS...when they get to the door of the convention whomever was in first place was not..."panning out"...
What does that mean? If you ask me it was a Wilhelm like statement just more eloquently put.
Just say it people. If Barack is in 2nd place in pledged and/or popular vote...the superDs are welcome to put him over the top because they think he's more electable. But if Hillary is in 2nd place they ARE NOT allowed to put her over the top because they think she is better prepared to be President.
I also believe that the repugs dogs will tear BHO to pieces in November. Hillary is a bit tougher meat, but seemingly poisonous to the media. But, I believe she would survive much better in November. I know I have the repeating disease, but the only hope would be a dream team for the dems. And no one has really suggested a good "healer" for August. A Blue "Heeler", perhaps? They sure a great dogs.
In hunting around for bits of my past for Alpha, I'm finding all sorts of interesting stuff. Young, activist, Obama supporter covering Diane Watson's support of Clinton with video and audio and article about other CBC members and their votes.
" After all, many have fallen for this Obama nonsense."
Gordo....we are all well aware of the right wing smear machine that got by with calling Max Cleland a coward. But the is NO REASON to bombard this crowd with all that crap. There are legitimate issues to discuss, but all you seem to do is go on-and-on-and-on about the potential smears.
I asked you once before: Shall we start up the Hillary is a lesbian who killed her loved Vince Foster talk?
Wendy: "From what I've seen...it's the young white voters that need a Moses...so alpha may be right that the younger black voters are looking at things from a far more practical and progressive lens.
It's an interesting discussion."
Indeed it is. And I think you are right about the anglos somehow needing a messiah more than the younger blacks.
"I'm not going to allow people to run me out of my support for my candidate. I don't think anybody wants the kind of supporter that would run away when times are tough. Times are tough but I'm with her."
Wendy...I agree with you, but the media is really trying to push BHO over HRC. It is on every cable channel that it is over for HRC. Alter in his Newsweek opine whine 'Hillary Should Get Out Now,' states "But, to withdraw this week would be the best thing imainable for Hillary's political career. She won't, of course, and for reasons that help explain why she's in so much trouble in the first place." What sort of double speak is that?
" thought process that these African American voters are looking for some sort of Messiah"
That was a reference back to the Obama speech where he likened himself to a Joshuah preoceeding from the "Moses" generation of MLK. I'm not saying that all of the younger generation think that way, but rather that a lot of his supporters are seeing the picture he is painting of them and himself.
Gordo, You may have noticed that we tend to converse from message to message. Sometimes we CONVERSE, but tht usually tapers off eventually. What we don't do is just dump and run with some article or constantly hit on the same story over and over ... well except when we are CONVERSING.
You might try just talking instead of proclaiming.
Jamie, thanks for the Leimert Park link. This was one of the first areas integrated by African Americans post World War II. As you may know, until the William Byron Rumford Act, many African Americans were restricted from living in certain Los Angeles neighborhoods because of race clauses. Former mayor Tom Bradley moved to Leimert Park as one of the first blacks there.
My parents graduated from Manual Arts and Washington High respectively in 1965, so they're boomers too. Much of central Los Angeles was transforming from white/Japanese (particularly in Leimert Park) to black. In 1972, we moved to Inglewood where we were one of the first black families on the block.
I mention this because it's important to understand that black Gen Xers and millennials are solidly middle class compared to previous generations. Around 70% of African Americans consider themselves to be in the middle class. So opportunities were presented and taken. And that affects the mindset.
I actually graduated from Loyola High School, the oldest high school in Los Angeles. We're also recognized as one of the best academic schools in California. That Jesuit experience shapes how I look at issues in my community. And one quick note: I think we have to get more sophisticated about how we look at race and culture.
I noted before that younger African American voters aren't particularly interested in racial politics, but black politicians who meet the needs of all Americans. Because our needs are the needs of all Americans.
HOWEVER, because we are so afraid of race, we tend to negate the importance of African American culture. Like any other culture, African Americans bond around things that tie them together. Whether we live on the same block, go to the same church, are related or not related, live in the suburbs/inner city, we see ourselves as being part of one community and one culture. It is our strength and what has allowed us to beat slavery, beat Jim Crow and beat the new strategies of our enemies. That said, there's always been a diversity of thought in our culture. WEB DuBois was polar opposite of Booker T. Washington. MLK and Malcolm X were sometimes opposed. And I could go on ad nauseum. But at the end of the day, we remain a community. And that's why it's important that our representatives be very in touch with the community needs. If you're not, you can find yourself looked upon as either malicious outlyer (Ward Connerly, Condi Rice) who works actively against the needs of the community, or irrelevant. The CBC members are fighting to remain relevant.
I believe that every black CBC Clinton supporter has the right to support whomever they want. What I don't believe is that they should complain because they get flack from their constituents. Hey, I'd say that for anyone supporting Obama against the wishes of their voters. If you make a choice, then by all means, stick with it. But don't be shocked when someone may mobilize against you. That's democracy.
The public has already heard that stuff about Hillary. Obama is an unknown - he will be defined by the Right Wing. Many of his supporters will be disappointed and drop off. Yesterday, I heard a reporter ask a young white man why he was for Obama. The answer, " uh uh uh uh CHANGE!". That's a soft voter-would he be for Obama in Nov?
Did anyone notice that in yesterday's often-aired clip, Senator Clinton, referring to Senator Obama, criticized him for "toutin' " his credentials and "runnin' " for office instead of holding committee meetings? Is her Texas strategy to emulate Mr. Bush, dropping each g to sound as down-home friendly as he does?
Also, Craig, you questioned Senator Obama's position on NAFTA. Just because we "present a friendlier face to the world" (which you pointed out was one of Senator Obama's objectives), that doesn't mean that we can't negotiate, does it? It is Mr. Bush who sees friendliness and negotiation as mutually exclusive terms, but they really don't have to be.
It has been ages since I've thought about Loyola HS. You were very fortunate to attend such a remarkable school. Is the kid you were getting off to school a boy or girl? Are we looking at a possible second generation attendee?
You do say something that disturbs me a bit: "HOWEVER, because we are so afraid of race, we tend to negate the importance of African American culture."
Maybe just a bit ahead of my time or the rather weird upbringing, but it's never been a fear of any kind for me. At the same time I recognize and respect that groups of similar heritage share a zeitgeist that others without that background can only learn and appreciate in part. Still it has always been true that there is a commonality of needs and desires to all no matter who or what they are and I think if we can expand from that commonality, then the racial aspect will become something that we visit and enjoy by choice.
I have a race-related California story that shows how bizarre this country can get.
My dad hitched his way from Kansas to California during the Dust Bowl. He took a look around the fruit picking business and opted to go for oil wildcatting with a small company around Pomona. My folks and four older sisters stayed until World War II was almost over. My oldest sister was a junior high cheerleader in Pomona, and one day my parents received a letter to come to the school about a "problem."
The problem was, a bunch of parents had got together a petition against "that Jap on the cheer squad."
Dad stopped at the school the next morning and when he walked in, the principal said, "Oh! Is your wife Japanese?"
"No," he answered.
"Well, maybe your daughter just looks foreign because you're a Mexican," the principal answered.
My father was fairly dark skinned, with very black hair. But his heritage was French and Welsh. He never did correct them, though.
In Denver a lot of people thought my kids were Chicanos, especially because we were close to Corky Gonzales' crowd. And when we moved to TN, even the black assistant principal at my daughter's high school thought she was a light-skinned black. Tracy never corrected her until during her senior year when the woman gave her some minority scholarship forms to fill out.
"If you make a choice, then by all means, stick with it. But don't be shocked when someone may mobilize against you. That's democracy. "
Awhile back there was a great deal of discussion about how should these Super Delegates vote: With their conscience or with their delegates. If the choice is "with their delegates" then a Ted Kennedy should be voting for Hillary Clinton. If with his conscience, then the vote goes to Sentor Obama. I think you have a what is good for the goose situation. If members of the CBC go against their consituents, then there is no problem with other legislators going against the will of theirs, but if the pressure is to vote with your constituents or else, then that must be true of all.
Cherrypicking among the "I get this one because of their voters and I get this one because he/she supports me" just doesn't fly.
Alpha: agreed about the you may get mobilized against for who you support...I admire Maxine Waters for saying she'd rather lose her seat. I also admire Tubbs Jones for having the guts to stick it out as well and not fold to the pressure. Yes, it's politics, but it shows that these women will stand on principal rather than fold to political pressure - that's what we need in Washington...not a vague notion of Obama change...but these kind of women that will stand up to political pressure...especially political pressure from the boys club. I need to do more research on Tubbs Jones - I really like her style and exuberance.
Also...I grew up in North Long Beach sounds like around the same time you were in Inglewood so we were neighbors.
"Now no one is surprised to have Mr. Goolsbee possibly talking to Canada. Trying to hide that fact once the story is out is another matter. However, the problem really comes in when Obama is obviously telling Ohio voters one thing to get their votes, while his econ guy is assuring a NAFTA partner that nothing is going to change if he gets into the White House."
That is a funny story. My father is a dark hair, dark complected Scot so I had the olive complextion from that side and then the rather reddish hair from my mother as well as high cheekbones courtesy of some indian in the family. People both in the state and in Mexico would come up and start chattering away in Spanish and unfortunately get a rather blank stare in return until I could get them to slow down enough for my limited vocabulary to handle.
If I recall my first primary convention for Bill, we were in lockdown until they drove our ballots to Denton county HQ. I remember it being kind of a long night anyway; seems like I was there for a couple of hours.
It may be true what dog posted.
{Dog posted: "latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%)"
This is great news - another reason people have been pointing to why Obama should be the candidate...electability has now also been dispelled.}
However without Independents and even some Republicans crossing the line to vote Democratic in the election a Democrat can not win.
Democratic sources said both campaigns have made it clear that they might consider legal options over the complicated delegate selection process, which includes both a popular vote and evening caucuses. But the sources made it clear that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit.
"Both campaigns have made it clear that they would go there if they had to, but I think the imminent threat is coming from one campaign,'' said one top Democratic official, referring to the Clinton campaign. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity.
Both camps threatened to sue - one anonymous "top" Democratic official said he/she thought the Clinton camp really threatened, so the banner is the Clinton camp threatened to sue. That's it - Arianna can push her candidate, but not at me.
Well, after 2 years of using HuffPo as a major source for political news, I have to look for someplace else. Two straws today have broken the camel's back. Here's a column HP carried 2 weeks ago about Hillary's opposition to NAFTA - note the sources in the story.
Two opposing views from different viewpoints - the insiders whose job it was to promote their boss' agenda and one of the preeminent reporters with access to those folks said she opposed it, the outsiders who opposed it and didn't hear her speak out publicly against her husband's new presidency (what first lady has ever publicly challenged her husband's agenda?) say she didn't. Huffpo of course sides with the outsiders and banners the article today as a conclusion.
To avoid multilink prison, I'll post the other straw separately.
I just can't take a progressive political news source that I once respected pushing bias for one progressive candidate over the other - back to the Times, the Post and RealClearPolitics, I suppose.
Did you look at the poll - Hillary and Obama are within a few points of each other on the Indie vote as well as the Republican vote (which for vote would not even be worth talking about as criteria - 8 and 5 percent)...so I stand by my electability not worth waisting a vote on Obama argument.
The head of the Democratic party here in Washington is getting a rather large earful about the caucus system as well. These states simply were and are not ready for the Obama caucus machine and the Clinton camp got blindsided by it and are just now trying to figure out a way to fight back.
The sheer size of the turnout as well as the coordinated transportation of large groups was an aspect that these for the most part, pleasant evening out with like minded friends, has turned into a high pressure juggernaut. There is an intimidation factor involved in having your decision overwhelmed by a much larger opposition group and when that group (See Alpha1906 above about fear and cultures) is of another race it becomes even more intimidating. I know there was one very forceful lady in Washington pushing in our precinct and I was lucky to hang on to the small crew of Clintons I was able to corral until we reached a respectful, laugh filled understanding that poaching on either side was not a good thing and just sat down to count and add up the numbers together.
It was probably always a method waiting to be exploited, but Senator Obama did it in this election and it cost Senator Clinton all those caucuses. This will be the wave of the future now and I can see a whole lot of states moving to the primary system simply because it exposed a way for a movement to potentially erase the democratic will of the majority of the people.
It's my pet name for you, darling. Some people shorten the name Brian to Bri (long i), I use B'rye (separating the B and spelling it like the grain). And now, I guess it's also my pet name for HRC.
jamie - I thought your cheekbones were a Scotty-osity, too, because both Glenn & Bruce Campbell's look similar.
And that's why I love this place. Politics, facial features, music, recipes, advice to the lovelorn...
Jamie your 12:57 is absurd, more Clintonista victim bullshit. If she can't manage to put together a successful ground game we're supposed to trust her running the world. ABSURD!
Dog it is interesting that you would make such a comment to me. I've never had a problem with you. I have both agreed and disagreed with you and have never made a disparaging remark about you or to you.
That said, it surprises me that you would call me out for being strident when there are clearly far more STRIDENT people posting on the comments section of this blog than me. I don't recall you saying to any of the Obama supporters that they are "particularly strident" even though some clearly are far more strident than myself.
I would also never make a comment about that to someone - whether I think they are or not - they are entitled to their energy - if I'm offended or off put by someone that comments here - I simply skip it.
I usually don't respond to personal attacks as I usually choose to just...consider the source. You have never been a "consider the source" person for me...so...well...I guess...well it hurt my feelings...but I'll try to go on.
Archilochus: "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." - used as a HRC/BO comparison from the Huffpo link Brian put out.
I've enjoyed the race-politics conversation this a.m., as opposed to the normal fare here.
My only observation: Despite our backgrounds, the older and more dug in we get; the more responsible, moral, and less exposed (dare i say conservative) we find ourselves.
btw Alpha- I was impressed by a Bakari sellers, who came to BO defense during the SC brouhaha.
dog -- I realize that indies and Reagan voters are now running the Democratic party, but do we now have to read that slimy conservative queen Andrew Sullivan?
Brian, your 1:02 is absurd, more Obamamania bullshit. Equating managing to hire people to put together a successful ground game for statewide primaries and caucuses with trusting the chosen one to run the world is what is ABSURD! At leasat we know the criteria you're using to choose a candidate.
"Obama has no reason to challenge anything unless Billary decides to play dirty. " Right, which is why his camp has threatened it? As you said, bullshit.
"That said, it surprises me that you would call me out for being strident when there are clearly far more STRIDENT people posting on the comments section of this blog than me."
I resemble that! Ha -- Wendy, you aren't strident....you just haven't perfected the art of passive aggressive posting.
Patsi: yes, it is a good idea to read Andrew Sullivan. He's an excellent observer and amusing and pithy writer. I regularly do not agree with him, but he's my favorite blogger.
He endorsed John Kerry in 2004; could see what a disaster Bush was earlier than most conservative writers (he's a moderate conservative).
Besides which, he puts up some great links! Really liked this Texas college student who had a blog "John Kerry is a Douchebag but I'm voting for him anyway" -- iwth some carefully reasoned posts. Blog was taken down, but I would LOVE to see it again if anyone has a cached copy.
Wow...if only our biggest problem were a whether gays could get married...it would make this process so much easier.
As to the gay marriage issue...they have the same stance and frankly...BO stance on gay issues is far murkier than Hillary's so if it's gay issues...I'd personally be more worried about him.
Comments
woo?
yep..craig..nomination goes to highest bidder..
Posted by: tylenol
| February 29, 2008 6:15 AM
Good Morning
Craig, Agree with you fair assessment of retail politics.
however, as a member of the "YES WE CAN" supporters. Obama's campaign slogan means much more than getting a bunch of Borg to lock step in a 1984 vision towards our candidate.....the same with Clinton's supporters I suspect.
Posted by: Sheila The Chef Nun | February 29, 2008 6:16 AM
Good morning Ty,
I'm off to cook cook cook cook cook cook cook cook....
Everyone have a good day. AND if its not too much to ask, how about more issues.
So tired of reading the same arguements.
Posted by: Sheila The Chef Nun | February 29, 2008 6:18 AM
i think i'm channeling McLuhan....maybe..
the argument IS the issue
we've exhausted all the others...
morning, sheila... bring me a croissant on your way back, please?
Posted by: tylenol
| February 29, 2008 6:26 AM
Thanks for the laugh Craig - no demerits there!
Posted by: econsmed
| February 29, 2008 6:35 AM
on Taylor Marsh this morning posted that CTV-s sources reconfirmed the NAFTA story after the embassy spokesman denied
ithttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMpbpov-HcA
Posted by: econsmed
| February 29, 2008 6:48 AM
econ.....does not link........
Posted by: sturgeone | February 29, 2008 7:01 AM
Good video Craig.
Have to admit I will be glad when we get past March 4 so that one way or they other, the political folks have to come up with a new spiel. The current ones are getting mighty boring.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 7:02 AM
Sturgeone,
Had an i at the beginning of the string
thttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMpbpov-HcA
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 7:08 AM
so naturally I got a t in there where it didn't belong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMpbpov-HcA
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 7:09 AM
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18721308/mccain_resurrected
Posted by: sturgeone | February 29, 2008 7:18 AM
Matt Taibbi on Macenstein: (excerpt from my link above)
Back in 1999, McCain concluded a speech at Phillips Exeter in New Hampshire by shouting, "Never again do we send our men and women to fight and die in foreign conflicts unless our goal is victory!" Which is interesting, because that is exactly — almost word for motherfucking word — how McCain ended his latest speeches on the campaign trail in Maryland and Virginia. In other words, John McCain knew his answer to the Iraq War mess before it even happened. For good measure, he insisted that "only military men like General Petraeus" have the right to say when soldiers will come home from Iraq — not, he added with a sneer, "some civilian running for president." Nor, presumably, America's civilian population, which is being asked to send its sons and daughters to kill and die in a faraway country.
Posted by: sturgeone | February 29, 2008 7:19 AM
ooops......contains a vulgarissimo which i forgot to scrub.......sorry bout that, but it was Matt what done it......
Posted by: sturgeone | February 29, 2008 7:21 AM
Happy Leap Day! Guess this is the day Obama Girl can officially ask Boraak to marry her.
Sheila - Still looking for details on that slogan. "Can" what? How?
Texans - Are you going to your precint conventions after the polls close to support your candidate?
Craig - Love waking up to video blog.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 29, 2008 7:32 AM
has the story about the pressure on black super delegates been posted before? Sorry if it's a repeate
www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8762.html
Posted by: econsmed
| February 29, 2008 7:38 AM
good morning gang...
Craig..... great video.....
I've taken more than a few classes on retail sales..... and I employ the tactics that you mentioned used by both Clinton and Obama when I do a crafts fair.....
hey..... they work....
as for March 4th..... I have the same plan I mentioned the other day for March 5th...... hot tubbin'......
my goal this year is to come back from this ski vacation looking like a prune.....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 29, 2008 7:43 AM
Haven't read last night's thread yet, but in case anyone missed this...like the entire world...Nader picked a Veep...not that it matters.
"The Texas-born Gonzalez ran for mayor of San Francisco as a Green Party candidate in 2003 but lost to Democrat Gavin Newsom after a surprisingly close runoff election. Gonzalez has been largely inactive in city politics since then, though he has recently gone after both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a man he says lacks the ability to bring about real change."
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_8403735
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 29, 2008 7:57 AM
Good video, Craig, and I hope your Dad enjoyed the Cardinal!
Posted by: Flatus
| February 29, 2008 8:00 AM
I do hope that Ms Clinton gets to stay in this for a little longer so we have more time to shop around. It would be horrible if we lose this opportunity and then have buyer's remorse.
We certainly need more time to get to know Mr. Obama. I think he is still a little too unknown.
Posted by: ct | February 29, 2008 8:03 AM
I think the bi-partisanship of the people here is damaging this blog. You know what I mean! Last night , Dog was the first to post on the thread and she posted "Go Obama!" What happened to the days when people just said "Woo!"? I'm just waiting for the day when McCain supporters come here and get called "McCainiacs!" I remember the slogan that said "I gave up hope and it worked just fine." About Obama and his pledge to meet with certain world leaders without any conditions. Bush obviously feels that would be terribly wrong to do. My guess is that Obama would put his trust in these other world leaders , but Bush doesn't trust some of these world leaders. If we don't trust these other world leaders , then how are they ever gonna become trustworthy? Besides , how may people here actually trust our country's leader? I guess my hangup is that Obama speaks in such a way that he makes everything sound like it would be easy to do. End the war quickly , talk to Raul Castro etc....I just can't see things being as easy as he's making them sound. In closing , I enjoyed the video Craig. How much do you want for the swamp land?
Posted by: Corey
| February 29, 2008 8:05 AM
PS
I have certainly been guilty of buying some, couldn't do without, handy gadgets that didn't do the job and fell apart very fast.
Posted by: ct | February 29, 2008 8:08 AM
Another group of brain cells seem to have gone on vacation. What is the name of that folk group Craig likes so much. I keep tapping on that synapse and it burps up the play title "Speed the Plow" and I know that's wrong. Help.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 8:14 AM
mornin' all.
On MoJo, I see that they were quoting a black superdelegate as saying that black superdelegates are being target with threats, intimidation and charges of being Uncle Toms if they don't commit to casting their vote for Obama. I guess this had to happen. I'm so glad Obama is not viewed as the black candidate and race is not a factor. To be fair, I'm not saying Obama is behind the pressure, although I do recall at least some of the Ombama supporters here claiming Hillary's campaign was behind every move they felt was offensive to Obama that her supporters made in the runup to the primaries, so applying their logic, I guess the Obama campaign must be behind this.
Damn, Mike Smith - Dave Clark 5 lead sinder is dead.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/arts/music/29smith.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
And for the morning's economic news - the Dow is down more than 100 and bernanke thinks everything is AOK. I feel so much better knowing that all those gloomy economic reports don't mean the economy is in bad shape.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 8:16 AM
Alpha, In your long piece yesterday evening (10:23) in which said us white folk are completely out of touch with the black community and that we just don't get the movement, how about doing this.
_Not_ from what Sen Obama is saying, but from how black people are processing the total message, what _exactly_ does the under-40 cohort believe Obama is going to do when elected? Please be specific.
Is the treatment of the black community going to be different from that of the white community? If so, in what ways?
What happens in integrated communities? If fundamental changes are to be made, does it mean that efforts at integration were wasted effort?
Thanks
Posted by: Flatus
| February 29, 2008 8:17 AM
Blue,
I did the "Leap Day" bit on the blog today with references to both the ancient Roman tradition and a tip of the hat to Al Capp even though he put Sadie Hawkins day in November. At least that produced two fun songs from You Tube
Namely Me and Sadie Sadie Married Lady.
http://jdurward.blogspot.com
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 8:17 AM
Mr.Crawford you are right once again. that were more people your business willing to tell it straight as you do, voters of this country It would be able to make decisions based on what is real.
Posted by: Nivramel
| February 29, 2008 8:19 AM
Well, I have to run do some errands, and have much to do today - may check in briefly later this a.m., but who knows. Renee, good luck on that shrivelling if I don't get a chance to chat before you hit the H2O.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 8:21 AM
Jamie: is it the Old Crow Medicine Show, or something like that?
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 8:22 AM
Thank you Dog's Eye
That's the one.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 8:32 AM
awww..pogo..damn is right.. glad all over is my abfab song of all time...
Posted by: tylenol
| February 29, 2008 8:36 AM
dont forget Del McCoury.....................not a folk group, but still...............
Posted by: sturgeone | February 29, 2008 8:43 AM
Good morning.
Here's a link about the illegal army created by Der Fuhrer Bush and the Canadian Government.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57228
Do you feel any safer now?
God Bless.
Posted by: anon-paranoid
| February 29, 2008 8:47 AM
Corey: noted your 8:05 comment, and shall abide by your suggestion. But first another heresy, and then I shall behave for the day.
Reposting in entirety Alpha1906's comment from last night on political generational change in the African American community. It was too incisive to be lost in midst of a boring and quarrelsome thread.
============
From alpha:
You guys are SO clueless when it comes to black politics. The members of the Congressional Black Caucus are as divided as the rest of the Democratic Party. However, when they decided to back Hillary Cllinton, they made that decision thinking that they had enough clout and sway to bring their voters over to her column. However, the African American electorate is very different than what it used to be.
This is the post Civil Right generation. We're the ones who got up at the crack of dawn to go to integrated schools, live in integrated neighborhoods, while still maintaining our cultural connections. We don't walk lockstep with black leadership because we've been taught to QUESTION leadership. Also, 25 million of the 39 million African Americans in this country are 40 or younger. These African Americans understand politics, understand their own interests, and are HYPER aware of white liberal Democratic politicians promising the sky and delivering asphalt.
So when black CBC members decided to back Clinton, they showed that they were out of touch with their own constituents. With an average of eight out of ten African Americans voting for Obama, suddenly these CBC members saw their own futures in jeopardy. I don't buy all of these death threat claims. I DO buy the notion that for the first time in a LONG time, many of these representatives were challenged, and many like Stephanie Tubbs Jones, weren't used to it. These people suddenly had to stand up and be accountable to their community and state why they were going against their voters.
What you're seeing is a classic case of a generation outlasting their stay. Stale ideas. Not addressing many issues of interest to younger African American voters, like schools and the environment. And now, they're going to be challenged by younger black politicians.
BTW, you guys also fail to understand how pissed Clinton made younger African Americans. There's always been more hype about Clinton's connection to black people than the actual connection felt by the black community. He was always viewed favorably in CONTRAST to other presidents. He would do things like learn the lyrics of the Negro National Anthem, or have the right tone when talking to black people about issues. But when it came to actual policy, there's still a bunch of resentment in the community over a number of issues: Welfare reform, his tepid support of Affirmative Action, the absolutely useless Racial Commission that failed to deal with the effects of slavery, the "non apology" apology for slavery, his complete ignoring of Rwanda versus US action in the former Yugoslavia, Sister Souljah, etc.
But he really did believe, and a lot of the CBC members cozy with him let him believe, that he really was the first black president. But when the black electorate didn't think so, he threw a fit. One of the least reported on interviews that codified the black vote against Clinton was an interview he did on The Tom Joyner Show, which is the most popular syndicated radio show in this country. It was so "how dare you not do what I say" to the black community, that for weeks, listeners bombarded Tom Joyner (and Tavis Smiley who comments on the show) with protests.
Today, the John Lewis of the world understand that their world has turned upside down. Suddenly, being loyal to the King and Queen is less politically expedient than joining the rebels. Barack and his generation of African Americans are the rebels. The CBC members who back Clinton are free to do so, but they know that every political decision has a political cost and benefit. John Lewis figured his out faster than most.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 8:47 AM
CTV Re-confirms Obama NAFTA Story
"When last we convened on this story, the entire traditional media, cable outfits like CNN, and Obama blogs across the spectrum, were all in the tank for Obama. They had collectively pronounced untrue the story CTV had reported about Mr. Obama's campaign aide(s) (senior staff, worker bees or whatever title you want to include so as to incorporate all possible people that could have participated in this story) tipping the Canadian government that Obama's campaign rhetoric on NAFTA was all hot air. Not to worry, Obama's aide(s) said, whatever Obama is saying in Ohio about revisiting NAFTA, it won't apply in his presidency.
Obama's campaign issued a statement declaring "inaccuracies," while Obama himself said during a plane press gaggle (likely the same one referenced below) that the Canadian government had denied it happened. He really meant embassy spokesperson, but let's not quibble on a smoke screen. Meanwhile, the embassy statement declared there was no story. None. Translation: go away you silly media, there's nothing here. Thus, like good little lambs, the media and all those studious Obama bloggers went away. They're so obedient.
NAFTA story, developing... into something that could be a problem for Mr. Obama. Once again, it's about a lot more than NAFTA. It's the measure of the man's character that comes into question. Saying one thing in public to the American people in order to to get vote, then promising a neighboring government something else. It's anything but a new kind of politics."
http://www.taylormarsh.com
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 8:48 AM
I'm having a ball building my Pandora stations. Got three going now: The Piano Bar for evenings here with wine and conversation once the &(&%%%^)** election is through and one for folk, country, and bluegrass. Once those are done, I'll tackle Rock and Classical stations ... Eclectic R Us.
Suggestions welcome.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 8:51 AM
And speaking of "fun" , they have proposed making next Friday "Hawaiian shirt / Tie Dye shirt" day at work. It's supposed to be something to chase away the winter blues. So I guess people will either be walking around work looking like "party animals" or "Deadheads". By the way , the weather sucks here this morning. Snowing hard here for the past few hours.
Posted by: Corey
| February 29, 2008 8:56 AM
CTV Reconfirms Obama NAFTA Story
"Sources at the highest levels of the Canadian government — who first told CTV that a call was made from the Obama camp — have reconfirmed their position. "
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/02/29/ctv-reconfirms-obama-nafta-story/
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 8:59 AM
Sheila wrote: "Obama's campaign slogan means much more than getting a bunch of Borg to lock step in a 1984 vision towards our candidate.....the same with Clinton's supporters I suspect."
Well good thing for Clinton supporters we've got more than a campaign slogan to plop our money down on. And those discriminating buyers on the Clinton side like to look under the hood and kick the tires-we're not easily impressed by a fancy paint job.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 9:01 AM
Alpha -- Your comments from last night were well-thought and no doubt right, for the most part. But I don't think you can or should be sneering at people like Maxine Waters (to name one) as being out of touch. She is a great voice for education as well as for the black community AND woman.
I do agree that the so-called welfare reform was a very bad piece of legislation. At the time, I emailed every Tennessee rep in the house and senate and asked: "What about child care?"
And yes, I also agree that the Democrats have taken the black vote for granted. Just like Obama and Co. is now taking the baby boomer female vote for granted.
I repeat the question Flatus asked....what do you specifically see that Obama will do for your generation? And if he doesn't do much, how will that affect the young black voter? I know, for example, that my candidate will make women's issues a priority. She will protect women's right to choose, for one thing. Whereas Barack is on record as saying that women have the right to have "some control over their bodies." The word "some" jumped out and smacked me in the face. And I will say that I've started to see younger women show up on feminist blogs saying, "Until this campaign I didn't understand that this is still a VERY sexist society."
However, the basic problem with what you said, and I see this in the women's movement, too. Your generation ignores how and why you caught some breaks.
You wrote: "What you're seeing is a classic case of a generation outlasting their stay. Stale ideas."
Wow. Would you say that to Maxine Waters' or John Lewis' faces? I gotta believe that if she were around, Barbara Jordan would take you to the woodshed for that one.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 9:08 AM
Prince Harry pulled out from Afghanistan in wake of disclosure by Drudge report and "obscure Australian magazine." (So obscure has anyone seen Aussie pub name in a story?)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/28cnd-harry.html?hp
===============
Yesterday's story would have been a great opportunity for some enterprising cable channel with hours to fill to work up a little story on what the Bush daughters are doing to assist in Iraq and Afghanistan; Iraq being their dad's very own splendid little war.
Anyone?
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 9:11 AM
Dog's Eye
My first though on the first read through on Alpha's post made me think "serpent's tooth". An elderly man who had been bullied, bruised, and bloodied so that they could have that integrated life was being shoved out of the way as being unnecessary and told to betray the friendship of a lifetime unless he didn't wait one week to move his one vote.
It's all well and good for Joshua to stand on the shoulders of Moses ... they don't need to stomp him into the ground while they do it.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 9:11 AM
"What you're seeing is a classic case of a generation outlasting their stay. Stale ideas."
This is Obabma's message actually. Now if Obama could only cut the crap and come out and say this , we'd be in for a good news day.
Posted by: McCaina | February 29, 2008 9:16 AM
Patsi to Alpha: " I gotta believe that if she were around, Barbara Jordan would take you to the woodshed for that one."
Nah. She'd be too busy out campaigning for Obama.
=======
Jamie: I saw the video on John Lewis, and it's clear he is caught in crosshairs of his personal and deep affection/admiration for the Clintons and his constituents' views.
Once again, he is a leader in expressing that divide and not ignoring it.
He is aware in his bones, however, that 43 years after that dangerous march in Selma a young black man is in serious contention for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Sad fate for him that that young political star is up against Lewis's dear friend and ally of many decades.
Quite honestly, there are worse problems to have.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 9:20 AM
The press will torment Obama, too
"With Sen. Barack Obama now emerging as the Democratic front-runner, clear signs suggest that his press treatment will soon change and that the media will fall back into their routine of viewing -- and critiquing -- leading Democrats through the eyes of Republican spin.
Just last week, we saw how a single line from a Michelle Obama speech was seized upon by conservative partisans, led by Fox News, to suggest she is not patriotic, and how that attack was given a wider airing in the mainstream press. "
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200802280003?f=h_column
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 9:28 AM
Yes, dog -- it would be a good time to question what the twins and a LOT of young Repubs are doing during this war. Like Cheney during Vietnam, they all seem to have other priorities. But on cable news at least, whenever that is brought up, the commentators heap scorn on the whole notion.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 9:28 AM
dog's eye
It was more Alpha's comment on it that upset me. That kicked to the curb, out of the way old dog. One more week would have killed them?
You are right that the Democratic party took the black vote for granted and gave darn little other than an open door they could try to make the most of in exchange for that support. I just think they could have found a better young hero to follow to the Promised Land, though I have to admit he is good at promising.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 9:30 AM
Speaking of race relations , a woman I am friends with at work has an ex-brother-in-law who is the lead singer and guitarist in a blues band. He is white. The other two guys in his band are black. Last year , they played in a bluesfest show in the Muskegon , Mi. area. One of the black men in the band invited his black friends from work to come see their show. For the next week after their show this black man's friends did not want to speak with him at all. Why? Because he had a white guy in his band.
Posted by: Corey
| February 29, 2008 9:31 AM
Hey guys,
I'm just now getting up on the West Coast and have a kid to get ready for school. I'll answer your questions in a couple of hours.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 9:33 AM
Jamie: I don't see the kicked to the curb old dog that you do. I see a lion in his late years, beset by a change he did not see coming. In this case, it is not a bad change at all -- it's a group of young leaders fresh and ready to get in there and solve some problems, some of which they define differently than their elders.
It would be worse if that were NOT happening.
And this is not the African plain. Rep. Lewis is safe and fed and listened to plenty, and has lots more to say.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 9:40 AM
"Nah. She'd be too busy out campaigning for Obama. "
dog's -- She might well be on his team. Or not. And which ever candidate she backed, whoa-be-unto the fool who tried to mug her for it. One thing though, I'd put money down that Barbara Jordan would have demanded time on Matthews or one of the shows that were so blatently sexist to have her say. And if you get chills listening to Obama....you should have heard Barbara.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 9:50 AM
Ya know, it is what it is. I don't begrudge the Obama supporters for pressuring the superdelegates they think they can in order to make sure the messiah is nominated - and as I've said in the past I'll vote for him if he's the nominee - actually, it will be a grudging vote against McCain, but the effect is the same. I do begrudge the Obama camp for not acknowledging that their supporters have turned to playing the race card (and I HATE that expression, but it does convey what I think I see happening.)
But do I blame then for playing it? No I don't. Loyalty to old friends who have worked on your behalf in the past may not move whatever you perceive as your agenda, whether it be to stay in office or to advance policies that benefit you or whatever, and this is, after all, politics. I'm sure that many blacks see Obama as having more interest in addressing problems that affect many of the disadvantaged in their ethnic group - although I haven't heard that articulated and haven't heard how he plans to do that - and if so,they should support Obama and put pressure on their representatives to vote for him in their superdeegate role. Of course a line is drawn through this process, and it is a line that may come back as providing the ability for Obama to gain thenomination, and perhaps even the office, but may prevent him from being able to gather sufficient support for his agenda togovern effectrively. Then again, it may not.
But I have to say that it is discouraging to hear the same rhetoric I heard in the 60s and 70s about black leaders betraying their people and being Uncle Toms if they don't vote for Obama no matter what their own beliefs may be, but I guess we haven't gotten past the racial divides that have existed since the days of reconstruction, and it is deeply disappointing to see that. But maybe this is just paleo racial politics since I obviously don't get it, as Alpha has pointed out.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 9:53 AM
Thanks, Craig. Obama has perpetuated one of the biggest frauds in election history and the media aren't paying attention.
Hillary's campaign has definitely made mistakes and has not been nimble enough but the media has never concentrated on the beef--for most of them (MSM and so-called progressive blogs) it's been a Hillary-bashing, Obama-worshipping dog fight and the American people haven't figured it out.
Posted by: bayareavoter
| February 29, 2008 9:54 AM
Here's part of the story on the link I posted above.
North American Army created without OK by Congress
U.S., Canada military ink deal to fight domestic emergencies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 24, 2008
1:45 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
In a ceremony that received virtually no attention in the American media, the United States and Canada signed a military agreement Feb. 14 allowing the armed forces from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even one that does not involve a cross-border crisis.
If you missed the link here it is again.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57228
If you think NAFTA is bad than what do you think about having Canadian Troops on our streets if the American Citizens rise up against our Government when Martial Law is enacted?
Could they be used if Der Fuhrer starts another war before the elections in November? Would you be willing to submit to foreign troops on our soil shooting American Citizens who will be labeled Enemy Combatants by Der Fuhrer Bush under the MCA of 2006 if we resist Martial Law?
You all better start thinking about this because it is a very real possibility this can occur.
God Bless.
Posted by: anon-paranoid
| February 29, 2008 10:02 AM
pogo....
great post! what I see with this election process so far is classic human nature....
humans tend to gather round their own kind.... or tribe.... and yeah.... because of all our modern toys we think we've outgrown it..... but not so....
and no..... the younger generation will not change it either..... unless of course.... they aren't human..... ;)
well..... I'm off to my book club..... and off to packing for a much needed vacation....
Rick will be bringing along his laptop..... so I might surface a bit..... but then again.... I might just take a break from the machine.....
Take Care Everyone!
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | February 29, 2008 10:12 AM
Washington Monthly: bears out what we are seeing in the comments section here: latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%), but Obama pulls more independents and GOP.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_02/013225.php
Remember: 2008 McCain is not your 2000 Straight Talking McCain. I would not bet those independents will gravitate to him as previously, because Obama is now the change candidate and McCain is swathed in Bush's reflected, uh, glory.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 10:13 AM
Just to keep you informed: The Right Wing has not given up on the Larry Sinclair story. It does appear that the polygraph exam was a set-up designed to discredit Sinclair --- very suspicious details. (There may have been a $750,000 payoff to WhiteHouse.com).
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 10:20 AM
About race relations - I know zero African Americans. I did not avoid them, I just have never had an opportunity to develop a friendship with anyone of that race. I have lived all over this country, I have met almost every other race and religion. So I have no first hand knowledge of anything about being black in America in 2008.
It is really interesting to watch all these racial issues being discussed.
Posted by: McCaina | February 29, 2008 10:25 AM
Patsi- Your comment about Barbara Jordan clicked into my memory banks:
And if you get chills listening to Obama....you should have heard Barbara.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 9:50 AM
So right you are! I could almost hear her eloquent remarks delivered in her very distinct , melodic voice at the Nixon impeachment hearings as if it just occurred.
Thanks for bringing her up, lest we forget those who came before & fought to open doors for many others.
I'd like to believe that she would stand with Hillary today.
Posted by: Coreen | February 29, 2008 10:28 AM
I did ask a question about that Ohio brochure put out by Senator Obama's campaign, but didn't receive an answer. It said there was a picture of him with his father with the caption about his parent's influence on his life. My question was father or stepfather. If it was his father rather than stepfather, then that is more of the bait and switch tactics that disturb me.
I'm looking forward to the conversation with Alpha simply because we will definitely be talking from two different generational viewpoints and she's on the west coast. If she's California, then there will be a whole lot of interesting perspective going on.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 10:31 AM
Jamie: Alpha's a he, I think.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 10:33 AM
Oops ... gender bias: child to get off to school (daddy's do that sort of thing too) :-)
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 10:38 AM
jamie, they (we) sure do. :-)
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 10:42 AM
Oh this is funny. Maybe he should have stopped by here for a real taste of the action.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dot.comments/2008/02/are_we_there_yet.html?hpid=topnews
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 10:49 AM
All right,
I have a bit of time, so let me try to consolidate some of the questions asked. Please excuse any spelling or grammatical errors.
Patsi et. al.,
The CBC members falling out of favor because of a disconnect with their voters is nothing unique to African American politics. It happens everywhere. But with black Congressional leaders, it's just a bit more stark when it happens.
When speaking about Maxine Waters, of all CBC members, I know her the best. For most of my life, she was my Congressional representative. And like most CBC reps, her focus is around traditional CBC issues (social services in her district) and national issues. That's fine and that's important. But when you've been unchallenged for your seat for decades, you tend to think that the ideas that may have been important when you were first elected, are still the same important issues five or six terms later.
So these CBC members don't recognize the issues when college educated African Americans who grew up in their districts, decide to come back and buy homes. What are those issues? Well, many of them are purchasing risky sub prime loans as a pathway to the middle class. Now a CBC member on the ball would recognize that hey, "maybe we should really, really make sure that we have oversight so that if things go belly up, our neighborhoods won't be devastated."
Instead, this is what happened:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/banking/2007-04-17-subprime-usat_N.htm
That gets the attention of young African American voters. They then take a look around their neighborhoods and begin asking questions. Why is their representative against vouchers, particularly when they are spending money to send their child to parochial schools because their neighborhood public schools have been and always will be crappy? Their representative may be tied to the teachers union because they need to get re-elected, but the African American voter says they're not willing to sacrifice their child's one time education for a CBC's re-election.
These African American voters then begin looking at food deserts (places where fresh fruits and vegetables are almost non existent) and begin wondering why their CBC rep hasn't fought for funds to create urban farmers markets? This black voter pays attention to things like the latest ag bill which allocated $30 mill for urban gardens. Did your CBC rep take part? Did they even recognize the problem?
So when you have year after year of CBC members not concentrating on the issues of TODAY rather than living off the works of YESTERDAY, then you get challenged. And if anyone has any doubt that these African American voters will look all of these CBC members dead in the eye and tell them that, including Waters, Lewis and yes, the late Barbara Jordan, then they missed what happened during this primary.
If this was a decade ago, Hillary would have picked all of the right CBC members to influence. But guess what? This year, those same CBC members not only were rejected but received enough blow back that they started having to answer for their own performance. Some CBC members recognized that early, like Rep. Clyburn. Others, like Charles Rangel, were and are tone deaf.
So the Civil Rights era CBC membership is about to be challenged and then passed. You'll start seeing more Duval Patricks, Cory Bookers, Barack Obamas, running for office. Funny, but you should start looking at this as moving beyond racial identity politics to something more complex. These new representatives will have forward ideas that are more geared toward issues that affect all Americans.
I've gotta run, but I'll post more later.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 10:50 AM
" the Larry Sinclair story."
Gordo, give it up. That story is so bogus that only people who are too stupid to find their polling place will believe it.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 10:52 AM
Most definitely a HE.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 10:53 AM
Good Morning, Craig
Very creative video especially on a Friday leap year day that won't exist next year. Now I understand why elections are held during leap years (I think there might be an exception to this...not understanding all celestial/calendar mathematics), one more day of politicking!
And where did you find that "pimpish" dude on Scam #3...David Shuster files?
Thanks for the smile.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 29, 2008 10:55 AM
"'African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened,' said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.)...'nasty letters, phone calls, threats they’ll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom.'"
A little follow-up to last nights discussion. Listening to POTUS08 and other programs this morning...it really angers me that they don't talk more about this or give voice to this. Someone said MSNBC did this morning...I missed that part and only saw the very end where Clayburn said they weren't being threatened...of course...he's a guilty party so of course he would say that.
"Rep. Diane E. Watson (D-Calif.), a black lawmaker and Clinton backer, said the intense lobbying for Obama would not alter her vote...'I’ve gotten threatening mail,' Watson said. ..But I don’t intimidate. I can hold the ground. … I would lose my seat over my principles.'"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8762.html
Enjoy...
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 10:56 AM
jamie, that sounds like a younger group than ours. indeed he should have stopped by here - of course only when brian and ET are going at each other.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 11:01 AM
One last thing before I hit the road. Jamie, you should get out of the thought process that these African American voters are looking for some sort of Messiah to lead them out of the desert. This idea that we're constantly on the lookout for the next MLK (or as Africans call it, The Big Chief Syndrome) is wrong.
In fact, one of the lessons this generation of younger African Americans learned is that there is no one leader and we don't need a Moses. So Barack isn't looked at in that way. He IS looked at as a representative of themselves: Educated, intelligent, on equal terms (or better) with white opponents, and very secure with who he is. In other words, the values the Civil Rights movement was supposed to create in an African American.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 11:04 AM
Dog posted: "latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%)"
This is great news - another reason people have been pointing to why Obama should be the candidate...electability has now also been dispelled.
He's not going to bring change to Washington because he's proven that he participates in old school dirty politics like the rest of them. So change is no longer a criteria.
He's not the only DEM leading over McCain in a general election. So electability is off the table.
So what other criteria do we have?
Oh...who is best prepared and has a detailed plan to move us forward out of the mess we're in...that would be Hillary. So obviously Hillary should be the democratic nominee.
:-D
I'm so glad we had this chat.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 11:09 AM
Alpha --- Walk soft around the memory of Barbara Jordan....we ALL owe her a lot.
"It is reason and not passion which must guide our deliberations, guide our debate, and guide our decision."
Barbara Jordan, testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, July 25, 1974.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 11:09 AM
alpha, between work,errands and hosting band practice for Li'l Pogo's band, I'm going to be in & out today and may miss you while you're on, but want to let you know that I appreciate your perspective and the thoughtfulness of your posts. You bring a perspective that in this transformational political season we aging boomers definitely need. Oh, and welcome to the daddy get the kid ready and to school club. I'm not much of a joiner, but that's one club I'm happy to have become a member of.
And mornin' Wendy! That was me that caught the Cleaver discussion on mojo and brought it up.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 11:09 AM
Having read Alter's 'Between the Lines,' I really didn't get his reasoning (I saw you had a reference to it on your video). If HRC, was more behind in delegates, I would see his point. I mean the same case could be made for BHO to step aside...it is that close. The media is playing-up 11 straight losses and ignoring California. I sure remember hearing that February would most likely be a 'winless" month for Hillary back in January. If the dem nomination were a "winner take all" primary/caucus like the repugs, I could see this. It will be interesting to see the results after March 4th. It isn't over yet, eventhough the media wants us to believe that. Maybe hate is stronger than love in the media. There is a fine line between hate and love and they are not opposites. The opposite of love/hate is apathy.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 29, 2008 11:13 AM
Patsi -----------------------
Do you follow the Right Wing? They are very good at Attack/Smear. I don't have all that much confidence in the voting public. After all, many have fallen for this Obama nonsense.
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 11:20 AM
Hey pogo - need to find the clip...
Scott Walterman on POTUS08 didn't even bring it up - put this - change is in the air spin on it w/o getting to the heart of what was really going on - threats and intimidation wrapped up with a pretty bow of change.
That said...I actually do appreciate alpha's POV on the issue of young black voters and think the last part of his post regarding young black voters not looking for a Moses was very interesting.
From what I've seen...it's the young white voters that need a Moses...so alpha may be right that the younger black voters are looking at things from a far more practical and progressive lens.
It's an interesting discussion.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 11:21 AM
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/why-im-afraid-of-the-clintons/index.html
Another link for Craig on Republican logic. And the fact more Democrats have voted for Clinton so far adds to the picture.
Obama would like Democrats to believe that come November, those Republicans and Independents will vote blue over McCain. With new sanctions on Iran, warships off Lebanon, blood in Darfur, violence in Gaza, moderates in Pakistan signing deals with militants, Canadians rejecting NAFTA blasts, Chavez threatening neighbors, NATO limp in Afghanistan, McCain won't be looking so feeble. Add that to the media starting to examining the Obama stories and Democrats might be stunned over their candidate.
Or maybe we all will just believe.
Glad to see I was not the only one with long posts...LOL
Posted by: Maxtrue | February 29, 2008 11:26 AM
Alpha,
Those are all interesting issues and since I know the city well, I can particularly understand the importance of the housing and access to quality stores within the area.
You may find it interesting that in 1944 my parents lived in Leimert Park. At the time it was middle class white but transitioned over to black by the 50s. I last visited the neighborhood in 1961, but at least got to see the beginnings of the art and jazz scene there. At the time I lived in Westchester which was a white area. That school has now become part of a multi racial middle class area. My father graduated from Fremont High School in 1934 and I attended school there during 1959. Again a story of transition from white to black with the generational shift as the school had become about 90% black and 10% mexican with whatever smidge of a percentage that could be carved off was me.
The whole point being that for a variety of reasons, I've always taken a multiplicity of racial influences for granted and in some ways deplore while understanding the almost harsh aura that the younger AA generation displays.
In thinking about this, I did a little surfing. You might find this web page dedicated to Leimert Park interesting. http://leimertpark.ning.com/
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 11:27 AM
Oh all this talk about Hillary getting out of the race is being generated by the Obama campaign because their run is now coming to an end. Hillary is expected to win far more races than he in the coming up primaries and so going into the convention she'll look more like the frontrunner than he and the Obama camp is starting to worry. It's all about who is winning going into the convention.
Thought Clyburn's comments were very interesting this morning on MSNBC. He said superDs should not take 2nd place person and put them into first no matter who it is...UNLESS...when they get to the door of the convention whomever was in first place was not..."panning out"...
What does that mean? If you ask me it was a Wilhelm like statement just more eloquently put.
Just say it people. If Barack is in 2nd place in pledged and/or popular vote...the superDs are welcome to put him over the top because they think he's more electable. But if Hillary is in 2nd place they ARE NOT allowed to put her over the top because they think she is better prepared to be President.
Now that would be some straight talk express.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 11:29 AM
Maxtrue
I also believe that the repugs dogs will tear BHO to pieces in November. Hillary is a bit tougher meat, but seemingly poisonous to the media. But, I believe she would survive much better in November. I know I have the repeating disease, but the only hope would be a dream team for the dems. And no one has really suggested a good "healer" for August. A Blue "Heeler", perhaps? They sure a great dogs.
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 29, 2008 11:31 AM
In hunting around for bits of my past for Alpha, I'm finding all sorts of interesting stuff. Young, activist, Obama supporter covering Diane Watson's support of Clinton with video and audio and article about other CBC members and their votes.
http://jasmynecannick.typepad.com/jasmynecannickcom/2008/02/audio-rep-diane.html
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 11:37 AM
" After all, many have fallen for this Obama nonsense."
Gordo....we are all well aware of the right wing smear machine that got by with calling Max Cleland a coward. But the is NO REASON to bombard this crowd with all that crap. There are legitimate issues to discuss, but all you seem to do is go on-and-on-and-on about the potential smears.
I asked you once before: Shall we start up the Hillary is a lesbian who killed her loved Vince Foster talk?
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 11:38 AM
That would be "lover"....
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 11:39 AM
morning folks.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 11:41 AM
Wendy: "From what I've seen...it's the young white voters that need a Moses...so alpha may be right that the younger black voters are looking at things from a far more practical and progressive lens.
It's an interesting discussion."
Indeed it is. And I think you are right about the anglos somehow needing a messiah more than the younger blacks.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 11:41 AM
Stephanie Tubbs Jones:
"I'm not going to allow people to run me out of my support for my candidate. I don't think anybody wants the kind of supporter that would run away when times are tough. Times are tough but I'm with her."
Love that.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 11:42 AM
Wendy...I agree with you, but the media is really trying to push BHO over HRC. It is on every cable channel that it is over for HRC. Alter in his Newsweek opine whine 'Hillary Should Get Out Now,' states "But, to withdraw this week would be the best thing imainable for Hillary's political career. She won't, of course, and for reasons that help explain why she's in so much trouble in the first place." What sort of double speak is that?
Posted by: Blonde wino
| February 29, 2008 11:42 AM
Ya know...I really like Tubss Jones...she should run for President!
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 11:45 AM
Alpha,
" thought process that these African American voters are looking for some sort of Messiah"
That was a reference back to the Obama speech where he likened himself to a Joshuah preoceeding from the "Moses" generation of MLK. I'm not saying that all of the younger generation think that way, but rather that a lot of his supporters are seeing the picture he is painting of them and himself.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 11:47 AM
Gordo, You may have noticed that we tend to converse from message to message. Sometimes we CONVERSE, but tht usually tapers off eventually. What we don't do is just dump and run with some article or constantly hit on the same story over and over ... well except when we are CONVERSING.
You might try just talking instead of proclaiming.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 11:53 AM
Okay, I'm back.
Jamie, thanks for the Leimert Park link. This was one of the first areas integrated by African Americans post World War II. As you may know, until the William Byron Rumford Act, many African Americans were restricted from living in certain Los Angeles neighborhoods because of race clauses. Former mayor Tom Bradley moved to Leimert Park as one of the first blacks there.
My parents graduated from Manual Arts and Washington High respectively in 1965, so they're boomers too. Much of central Los Angeles was transforming from white/Japanese (particularly in Leimert Park) to black. In 1972, we moved to Inglewood where we were one of the first black families on the block.
I mention this because it's important to understand that black Gen Xers and millennials are solidly middle class compared to previous generations. Around 70% of African Americans consider themselves to be in the middle class. So opportunities were presented and taken. And that affects the mindset.
I actually graduated from Loyola High School, the oldest high school in Los Angeles. We're also recognized as one of the best academic schools in California. That Jesuit experience shapes how I look at issues in my community. And one quick note: I think we have to get more sophisticated about how we look at race and culture.
I noted before that younger African American voters aren't particularly interested in racial politics, but black politicians who meet the needs of all Americans. Because our needs are the needs of all Americans.
HOWEVER, because we are so afraid of race, we tend to negate the importance of African American culture. Like any other culture, African Americans bond around things that tie them together. Whether we live on the same block, go to the same church, are related or not related, live in the suburbs/inner city, we see ourselves as being part of one community and one culture. It is our strength and what has allowed us to beat slavery, beat Jim Crow and beat the new strategies of our enemies. That said, there's always been a diversity of thought in our culture. WEB DuBois was polar opposite of Booker T. Washington. MLK and Malcolm X were sometimes opposed. And I could go on ad nauseum. But at the end of the day, we remain a community. And that's why it's important that our representatives be very in touch with the community needs. If you're not, you can find yourself looked upon as either malicious outlyer (Ward Connerly, Condi Rice) who works actively against the needs of the community, or irrelevant. The CBC members are fighting to remain relevant.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 11:53 AM
Wendy!
I believe that every black CBC Clinton supporter has the right to support whomever they want. What I don't believe is that they should complain because they get flack from their constituents. Hey, I'd say that for anyone supporting Obama against the wishes of their voters. If you make a choice, then by all means, stick with it. But don't be shocked when someone may mobilize against you. That's democracy.
Posted by: alpha1906
| February 29, 2008 11:58 AM
Patsi ----------------------
The public has already heard that stuff about Hillary. Obama is an unknown - he will be defined by the Right Wing. Many of his supporters will be disappointed and drop off. Yesterday, I heard a reporter ask a young white man why he was for Obama. The answer, " uh uh uh uh CHANGE!". That's a soft voter-would he be for Obama in Nov?
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 12:06 PM
Did anyone notice that in yesterday's often-aired clip, Senator Clinton, referring to Senator Obama, criticized him for "toutin' " his credentials and "runnin' " for office instead of holding committee meetings? Is her Texas strategy to emulate Mr. Bush, dropping each g to sound as down-home friendly as he does?
Also, Craig, you questioned Senator Obama's position on NAFTA. Just because we "present a friendlier face to the world" (which you pointed out was one of Senator Obama's objectives), that doesn't mean that we can't negotiate, does it? It is Mr. Bush who sees friendliness and negotiation as mutually exclusive terms, but they really don't have to be.
Posted by: benjaminblue | February 29, 2008 12:08 PM
Alpha 1906
It has been ages since I've thought about Loyola HS. You were very fortunate to attend such a remarkable school. Is the kid you were getting off to school a boy or girl? Are we looking at a possible second generation attendee?
You do say something that disturbs me a bit: "HOWEVER, because we are so afraid of race, we tend to negate the importance of African American culture."
Maybe just a bit ahead of my time or the rather weird upbringing, but it's never been a fear of any kind for me. At the same time I recognize and respect that groups of similar heritage share a zeitgeist that others without that background can only learn and appreciate in part. Still it has always been true that there is a commonality of needs and desires to all no matter who or what they are and I think if we can expand from that commonality, then the racial aspect will become something that we visit and enjoy by choice.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 12:10 PM
I have a race-related California story that shows how bizarre this country can get.
My dad hitched his way from Kansas to California during the Dust Bowl. He took a look around the fruit picking business and opted to go for oil wildcatting with a small company around Pomona. My folks and four older sisters stayed until World War II was almost over. My oldest sister was a junior high cheerleader in Pomona, and one day my parents received a letter to come to the school about a "problem."
The problem was, a bunch of parents had got together a petition against "that Jap on the cheer squad."
Dad stopped at the school the next morning and when he walked in, the principal said, "Oh! Is your wife Japanese?"
"No," he answered.
"Well, maybe your daughter just looks foreign because you're a Mexican," the principal answered.
My father was fairly dark skinned, with very black hair. But his heritage was French and Welsh. He never did correct them, though.
In Denver a lot of people thought my kids were Chicanos, especially because we were close to Corky Gonzales' crowd. And when we moved to TN, even the black assistant principal at my daughter's high school thought she was a light-skinned black. Tracy never corrected her until during her senior year when the woman gave her some minority scholarship forms to fill out.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 12:13 PM
"If you make a choice, then by all means, stick with it. But don't be shocked when someone may mobilize against you. That's democracy. "
Awhile back there was a great deal of discussion about how should these Super Delegates vote: With their conscience or with their delegates. If the choice is "with their delegates" then a Ted Kennedy should be voting for Hillary Clinton. If with his conscience, then the vote goes to Sentor Obama. I think you have a what is good for the goose situation. If members of the CBC go against their consituents, then there is no problem with other legislators going against the will of theirs, but if the pressure is to vote with your constituents or else, then that must be true of all.
Cherrypicking among the "I get this one because of their voters and I get this one because he/she supports me" just doesn't fly.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 12:16 PM
Alpha: agreed about the you may get mobilized against for who you support...I admire Maxine Waters for saying she'd rather lose her seat. I also admire Tubbs Jones for having the guts to stick it out as well and not fold to the pressure. Yes, it's politics, but it shows that these women will stand on principal rather than fold to political pressure - that's what we need in Washington...not a vague notion of Obama change...but these kind of women that will stand up to political pressure...especially political pressure from the boys club. I need to do more research on Tubbs Jones - I really like her style and exuberance.
Also...I grew up in North Long Beach sounds like around the same time you were in Inglewood so we were neighbors.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 12:19 PM
CTV Names Obama Aide on NAFTA
"Now no one is surprised to have Mr. Goolsbee possibly talking to Canada. Trying to hide that fact once the story is out is another matter. However, the problem really comes in when Obama is obviously telling Ohio voters one thing to get their votes, while his econ guy is assuring a NAFTA partner that nothing is going to change if he gets into the White House."
http://taylormarsh.com/
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 12:22 PM
Patsi,
That is a funny story. My father is a dark hair, dark complected Scot so I had the olive complextion from that side and then the rather reddish hair from my mother as well as high cheekbones courtesy of some indian in the family. People both in the state and in Mexico would come up and start chattering away in Spanish and unfortunately get a rather blank stare in return until I could get them to slow down enough for my limited vocabulary to handle.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 12:23 PM
Microtrends vs Macrotrends: Why Obama is Winning
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/microtrends-vs-macrotrend_b_88962.html
Right on the money!
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:23 PM
This rumor about the possibility of Hillary challenging the Texas primary is disturbing, for her sake I hope it's nothing more than rumor.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:32 PM
Jamie -- "People both in the state and in Mexico would come up and start chattering away in Spanish "
Ha! The wait staff in Mexican restaurants always start speaking Spanish to my kids, as well.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 12:34 PM
If I recall my first primary convention for Bill, we were in lockdown until they drove our ballots to Denton county HQ. I remember it being kind of a long night anyway; seems like I was there for a couple of hours.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080229/ap_on_el_pr/texas_caucus_challenge
So, HRC, do I bother to show up or not?
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 29, 2008 12:37 PM
Wendy,
It may be true what dog posted.
{Dog posted: "latest Pew poll shows both Dem candidates beating McCain. Hillary Clinton is stronger among self-identified Democrats (89% vs 81%)"
This is great news - another reason people have been pointing to why Obama should be the candidate...electability has now also been dispelled.}
However without Independents and even some Republicans crossing the line to vote Democratic in the election a Democrat can not win.
Just a thought.
God Bless.
Posted by: anon-paranoid
| February 29, 2008 12:39 PM
By all means blue stay home!
*snickers*
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:41 PM
Agreed AP and as we have seen in just about every primary Obama draws far more independents and cross over votes than Hillary does.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:44 PM
Here's the other straw. Read the banner.
"Report: Clinton camp threatened to sue over Texas caucuse"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/
Now read the article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/16/texas-primary-latest-new_n_86930.html
Democratic sources said both campaigns have made it clear that they might consider legal options over the complicated delegate selection process, which includes both a popular vote and evening caucuses. But the sources made it clear that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit.
"Both campaigns have made it clear that they would go there if they had to, but I think the imminent threat is coming from one campaign,'' said one top Democratic official, referring to the Clinton campaign. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity.
Both camps threatened to sue - one anonymous "top" Democratic official said he/she thought the Clinton camp really threatened, so the banner is the Clinton camp threatened to sue. That's it - Arianna can push her candidate, but not at me.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 12:44 PM
Oops, the second post went out first.
Well, after 2 years of using HuffPo as a major source for political news, I have to look for someplace else. Two straws today have broken the camel's back. Here's a column HP carried 2 weeks ago about Hillary's opposition to NAFTA - note the sources in the story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/did-hillary-clinton-reall_n_86674.html
Here's the piece they are carrying today.
http://www.buckeyestateblog.com/93_nafta_congressional_opponent_she_never_offered_criticism
Two opposing views from different viewpoints - the insiders whose job it was to promote their boss' agenda and one of the preeminent reporters with access to those folks said she opposed it, the outsiders who opposed it and didn't hear her speak out publicly against her husband's new presidency (what first lady has ever publicly challenged her husband's agenda?) say she didn't. Huffpo of course sides with the outsiders and banners the article today as a conclusion.
To avoid multilink prison, I'll post the other straw separately.
I just can't take a progressive political news source that I once respected pushing bias for one progressive candidate over the other - back to the Times, the Post and RealClearPolitics, I suppose.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 12:45 PM
Well, well. B'rye answers to HRC. Come to think of it, I've never seen the two of you in the same place.
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 29, 2008 12:46 PM
benjamin, with all due respect, callin' Clinton out on morphing her accent is a bit disingenuous for a supporter of the preacher isn't it?
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 12:48 PM
who the hell is B'rye?
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:49 PM
Brian, read the article about challenging the caucus instead of Arianna's misleading banner - both camps made the same threat.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 12:50 PM
AP:
Did you look at the poll - Hillary and Obama are within a few points of each other on the Indie vote as well as the Republican vote (which for vote would not even be worth talking about as criteria - 8 and 5 percent)...so I stand by my electability not worth waisting a vote on Obama argument.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 12:52 PM
Wow - Obama campaign threatening legal action over TX...that's so slimy
;-)
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 12:54 PM
I did read the article pogo, Obama has no reason to challenge anything unless Billary decides to play dirty.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:54 PM
Wendy!: you see what you want to see. We all do, but you are particularly strident.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 12:55 PM
Pogo: 12:48 post
chuckled out loud...
hehehehe.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 12:56 PM
The head of the Democratic party here in Washington is getting a rather large earful about the caucus system as well. These states simply were and are not ready for the Obama caucus machine and the Clinton camp got blindsided by it and are just now trying to figure out a way to fight back.
The sheer size of the turnout as well as the coordinated transportation of large groups was an aspect that these for the most part, pleasant evening out with like minded friends, has turned into a high pressure juggernaut. There is an intimidation factor involved in having your decision overwhelmed by a much larger opposition group and when that group (See Alpha1906 above about fear and cultures) is of another race it becomes even more intimidating. I know there was one very forceful lady in Washington pushing in our precinct and I was lucky to hang on to the small crew of Clintons I was able to corral until we reached a respectful, laugh filled understanding that poaching on either side was not a good thing and just sat down to count and add up the numbers together.
It was probably always a method waiting to be exploited, but Senator Obama did it in this election and it cost Senator Clinton all those caucuses. This will be the wave of the future now and I can see a whole lot of states moving to the primary system simply because it exposed a way for a movement to potentially erase the democratic will of the majority of the people.
Posted by: jamie | February 29, 2008 12:57 PM
I guess when your own husband says if you don't win both Texas and Ohio it's over, legal challenges are all you have left.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 12:58 PM
It's my pet name for you, darling. Some people shorten the name Brian to Bri (long i), I use B'rye (separating the B and spelling it like the grain). And now, I guess it's also my pet name for HRC.
jamie - I thought your cheekbones were a Scotty-osity, too, because both Glenn & Bruce Campbell's look similar.
And that's why I love this place. Politics, facial features, music, recipes, advice to the lovelorn...
Posted by: blueINdallas | February 29, 2008 1:00 PM
Brian ------------------------
“As God Is My Witness”: Obama Snubs Newsom, Gays
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/02/29/as-god-is-my-witness-obama-snubs-newsom-gays/
Posted by: GORDO | February 29, 2008 1:02 PM
Jamie your 12:57 is absurd, more Clintonista victim bullshit. If she can't manage to put together a successful ground game we're supposed to trust her running the world. ABSURD!
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 1:02 PM
Andrew Sullivan today: The Urgent, Clear Choice for Gay Voters -- Obama
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/02/obama-stands-up.html
Obama's open letter to gay Americans
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/02/obamas-open-let.html
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 1:07 PM
Dog it is interesting that you would make such a comment to me. I've never had a problem with you. I have both agreed and disagreed with you and have never made a disparaging remark about you or to you.
That said, it surprises me that you would call me out for being strident when there are clearly far more STRIDENT people posting on the comments section of this blog than me. I don't recall you saying to any of the Obama supporters that they are "particularly strident" even though some clearly are far more strident than myself.
I would also never make a comment about that to someone - whether I think they are or not - they are entitled to their energy - if I'm offended or off put by someone that comments here - I simply skip it.
I usually don't respond to personal attacks as I usually choose to just...consider the source. You have never been a "consider the source" person for me...so...well...I guess...well it hurt my feelings...but I'll try to go on.
:-D
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 1:07 PM
That's not what the threatened suits are over, Brian.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 1:09 PM
Archilochus: "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." - used as a HRC/BO comparison from the Huffpo link Brian put out.
I've enjoyed the race-politics conversation this a.m., as opposed to the normal fare here.
My only observation: Despite our backgrounds, the older and more dug in we get; the more responsible, moral, and less exposed (dare i say conservative) we find ourselves.
btw Alpha- I was impressed by a Bakari sellers, who came to BO defense during the SC brouhaha.
Posted by: Rezdog
| February 29, 2008 1:09 PM
The Clintons have already shown their attitude towards gay issue, it's called The Defense of Marriage Act.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 1:13 PM
dog -- I realize that indies and Reagan voters are now running the Democratic party, but do we now have to read that slimy conservative queen Andrew Sullivan?
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 1:18 PM
Ok - so as not to be too STRIDENT
I have to admit...the new BO ad is better than the new Hillary ad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag8gOXZulXg
v.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M70emIFxETs
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 1:19 PM
I always figured Patsi a homophobe, now we know for certain.
Posted by: Brian In NYC
| February 29, 2008 1:21 PM
Brian, your 1:02 is absurd, more Obamamania bullshit. Equating managing to hire people to put together a successful ground game for statewide primaries and caucuses with trusting the chosen one to run the world is what is ABSURD! At leasat we know the criteria you're using to choose a candidate.
"Obama has no reason to challenge anything unless Billary decides to play dirty. " Right, which is why his camp has threatened it? As you said, bullshit.
Posted by: pogo
| February 29, 2008 1:21 PM
"That said, it surprises me that you would call me out for being strident when there are clearly far more STRIDENT people posting on the comments section of this blog than me."
I resemble that! Ha -- Wendy, you aren't strident....you just haven't perfected the art of passive aggressive posting.
Posted by: Patsi | February 29, 2008 1:21 PM
Patsi: yes, it is a good idea to read Andrew Sullivan. He's an excellent observer and amusing and pithy writer. I regularly do not agree with him, but he's my favorite blogger.
He endorsed John Kerry in 2004; could see what a disaster Bush was earlier than most conservative writers (he's a moderate conservative).
Besides which, he puts up some great links! Really liked this Texas college student who had a blog "John Kerry is a Douchebag but I'm voting for him anyway" -- iwth some carefully reasoned posts. Blog was taken down, but I would LOVE to see it again if anyone has a cached copy.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| February 29, 2008 1:22 PM
Wow...if only our biggest problem were a whether gays could get married...it would make this process so much easier.
As to the gay marriage issue...they have the same stance and frankly...BO stance on gay issues is far murkier than Hillary's so if it's gay issues...I'd personally be more worried about him.
Now can we solve bigger problems.
Posted by: Wendy!
| February 29, 2008 1:22 PM
Nope, not a homophobe....ju