Starting July 2, I will be working for Obama for America as a Field Organizer in Wisconsin. Although I do not yet know where in Wisconsin I will be located, I will find out shortly and will update my blog accordingly. I'm very excited about the opportunity.
As a disclaimer, any blogs that I have previously written and any that I write in the future are my own views. They do not reflect those of Barack Obama, Obama for America, or anyone within the campaign.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Obama Speaks Some Important Truths on Fatherhood
As Obama points out, not only does the government need to provide better support for the working class, but we all need to take more responsibility for ourselves and build the infrastructure that children need to succeed. More specifically, men need to live up the responsibilities that come with fatherhood. Obama's speech brings up some very relevant societal points.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
A Perfect Description of the Republican Attack Machine
A summary of what Barack and/or Michelle Obama apparently are:
Muslim
Not a Muslim, but part of a "seperatist" church
Sexist
Radical liberal
Bitter
Plagiarist
Unpatriotic
Racist
Terrorist sympathizer
Do neocons have no ethics or shame?
Jon Stewart, well done.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
A History of Anti-Sodomy and Anti-Homosexual Laws in the US
I read an interesting article discussing William Eskridge's book "Dishonorable Passions." The article summarizes Eskridges history of anti-sodomy laws and their ridiculousness and selectiveness. Eskridge discusses how Americans always have needed some boogey man to be afraid of, and now they have turned their attention to homosexuals/gay marriage to fill that void. The article (and book) is a good read and is worth checking out.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Jim Webb Talks About the Importance of the New GI Bill
With the GI Bill currently working its way through Congress, Sen. Jim Webb talked with Jon Stewart about, among other things, the hypocrisy in the Republicans' to pay for an ill-advised war, but not to support our veterans once they return home. The Bill itself would help fund a college education for American soldiers upon the completion of their military service. Is this an objectionable idea? Of course not. Yet the Bush administration has vowed to veto the Bill should it pass through the legislature, once again showing how George Bush and Republicans are only interested in support for their war, not the lives, health, and success of our men and women in service.
Do People Really Care About a Fist Pound? ...Seriously???
A Fox News anchor recently suggested that Barack and Michelle Obama's fist pound could have been a "terrorist jab." She and her guest then went on to discuss the pound, analyzing it's intricacies, meanings, and implications. - To clarify, no, this was not an article from The Onion. It's a serious (sort of) story. One can only roll their eyes at Fox news, and laugh at how out of touch they are.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
The Mindless Menace of Violence - 40 Years Later
In the early hours of June 5th, 1968, Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in the kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel following the California Primary and his victory speech. Today, his activism, calls to serve the poor and end poverty, and his dedication to bettering the lives of citizens in this country still ring true. Most notably, RFK believed in non-violence. He spoke at the Cleveland City Club only days after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on the mindless menace of violence. His words were prophetic, and unfortunately they still ring true today. I encourage you to read his speech below, and ask yourself if we still suffer from these same afflictions in our society.
This is a time of shame and sorrow. It is not a day for politics. I have saved this one opportunity to speak briefly to you about this mindless menace of violence in America which again stains our land and every one of our lives.
It is not the concern of any one race. The victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one – no matter where he lives or what he does – can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
Why? What has violence ever accomplished? What has it ever created? No martyr’s cause has ever been stilled by his assassin’s bullet.
No wrongs have ever been righted by riots and civil disorders. A sniper is only a coward, not a hero; and an uncontrolled, uncontrollable mob is only the voice of madness, not the voice of the people.
Whenever any American’s life is taken by another American unnecessarily – whether it is done in the name of the law or in the defiance of law, by one man or a gang, in cold blood or in passion, in an attack of violence or in response to violence – whenever we tear at the fabric of life which another man has painfully and clumsily woven for himself and his children, the whole nation is degraded.
"Among free men,” said Abraham Lincoln, “there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and those who take such appeal are sure to lose their cause and pay the costs.”
Yet we seemingly tolerate a rising level of violence that ignores our common humanity and our claims to civilization alike. We calmly accept newspaper reports of civilian slaughter in far off lands. We glorify killing on movie and television screens and call it entertainment. We make it easy for men of all shades of sanity to acquire weapons and ammunition they desire.
Too often we honor swagger and bluster and the wielders of force; too often we excuse those who are willing to build their own lives on the shattered dreams of others. Some Americans who preach nonviolence abroad fail to practice it here at home. Some who accuse others of inciting riots have by their own conduct invited them.
Some looks for scapegoats, others look for conspiracies, but this much is clear; violence breeds violence, repression brings retaliation, and only a cleaning of our whole society can remove this sickness from our soul.
For there is another kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. This is a slow destruction of a child by hunger, and schools without books and homes without heat in the winter.
This is the breaking of a man’s spirit by denying him the chance to stand as a father and as a man among other men. And this too afflicts us all. I have not come here to propose a set of specific remedies nor is there a single set. For a broad and adequate outline we known what must be done. “When you teach a man to hate and fear his brother, when you teach that he is a lesser man because of his color or his beliefs or the policies he pursues, when you teach that those who differ from you threaten your freedom or your job or your family, then you also learn to confront others not as fellow citizens but as enemies – to be met not with cooperation but with conquest, to be subjugated and mastered.
We learn, at the last, to look at our bothers as aliens, men with whom we share a city, but not a community, men bound to us in common dwelling, but not in common effort. We learn to share only a common fear – only a common desire to retreat from each other – only a common impulse to meet disagreement with force. For all this there are no final answers.
Yet we know what we must do. It is to achieve true justice among our fellow citizens. The question is now what programs we should seek to enact. The question is whether we can find in our own midst and in our own hearts that leadership of human purpose that will recognize the terrible truths of our existence.
We must admit the vanity of our false distinctions among men and learn to find our own advancement in the search for the advancement of all. We must admit in ourselves that our own children’s future cannot be built on the misfortunes of others. We must recognize that this short life can neither be ennobled or enriched by hatred or revenge.
Our lives on this planet are too short and the work to be done too great to let this spirit flourish any longer in our land. Of course we cannot vanish it with a program, nor with a resolution.
But we can perhaps remember – even if only for a time – that those who live with us are our brothers, that they share with us the same short movement of life, that they seek – as we do – nothing but the chance to live out their lives in purpose and happiness, winning what satisfaction and fulfillment they can.
Surely this bond of common faith, this bond of common goal, can begin to teach us something. Surely we can learn, at least, to look at those around us as fellow men and surely we can begin to work a little harder to bind up the wounds among us and to become in our hearts brothers and countrymen once again.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
A Perfect Example of When Concealed Weapons Don't Make Everyone Safer
The article linked describes the violence that recently broke out at Milwaukee's RiverSplash event. All I'll say in reaction is that this situation shows why Wisconsin shouldn't have legal concealed weapons provisions, and violence of this nature is counterproductive and unfortunate. When will we learn that violence is not an answer?
Friday, May 30, 2008
Is President Clinton Serious?
It looks like President Clinton and the HRC campaign have come up with a new reason that they're losing - a vast left wing conspiracy led by the media, Moveon.org, and other liberal groups. He's claiming that since March 4th, the college educated elites have been pushing her out of the race by suppressing her supporters and minimizing her momentum. He's basically saying that the upper class Obama supporters are holding down the poor, working class white folks.
This new excuse from the HRC campaign shows just how desperate they are becoming. Rather than accept the primary results in a dignified manner, they're now clinging to whining, finger pointing, and conspiracy theories. Through their sophomoric tactics, they've become the liberal version of George Bush. The Clinton campaign has regressed into the combative, personal attack driven campaign that is usually seen from the Republican attack machine (a machine that is in full force against Obama). It's disappointing to see this from a Democrat.
The frustrating part of all of this is the damage which the campaign is inflicting on the Democratic Party and on the liberal movement that has been sweeping across the country within the past few years. At this rate, the Clinton campaign will have sucked the life out of all the momentum that Democrats saw in 2006, with the worst case being an Obama loss in November. At this point, however, I wonder if HRC is even concerned about the party's fate beyond her own personal interest.
This new excuse from the HRC campaign shows just how desperate they are becoming. Rather than accept the primary results in a dignified manner, they're now clinging to whining, finger pointing, and conspiracy theories. Through their sophomoric tactics, they've become the liberal version of George Bush. The Clinton campaign has regressed into the combative, personal attack driven campaign that is usually seen from the Republican attack machine (a machine that is in full force against Obama). It's disappointing to see this from a Democrat.
The frustrating part of all of this is the damage which the campaign is inflicting on the Democratic Party and on the liberal movement that has been sweeping across the country within the past few years. At this rate, the Clinton campaign will have sucked the life out of all the momentum that Democrats saw in 2006, with the worst case being an Obama loss in November. At this point, however, I wonder if HRC is even concerned about the party's fate beyond her own personal interest.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
McLellan Blasts Bush Administration and "Culture of Deception"
Former White House Press Secretary Scott McLellan is releasing a new book chronicling his time in the Bush White House. Among other topics, McLellan discusses how he, along with the rest of the administration, went to Washington to change it, but ultimately ended up contributing to the "culture of deception" that existed. He goes on to discuss the lead up to the war in Iraq, getting caught up in the White House bubble, and the secrecy and compartmentalization surrounding the Vice President's office. The book is certainly worth checking out.
Although few of McLellan's comments are new, it is so incredibly damning for them to have come from a former member of Bush's inner circle. To hear these allegations from a man that was, between 1999 and 2008, the quintessential "Bushie" must lend credibility to his claims. McLellan's words also reiterate the recounts of other former Bush administration officials such as George Tenet, Richard Clarke, and Douglas Feith; men who were condemned by the Bush administration, but now have their criticisms validated by the memoir of yet another former staffer. The only difference is that this time it comes from a man with that had direct access to the President.
Not surprisingly, the Bush attack machine is responding by doing what it does best - attack the messenger. From Karl Rove to Dan Bartlett to Ari Fleischer, the only comments you heard in response to McLellan's book yesterday were attacks on his character and on him personally. Just this morning Bob Dole called McLellan a "miserable creature." Unfortunately, this has become the Bush (and Republican) motto when it comes to defending itself. Rather than discuss the charges of the book (or the issue at hand), they attack who the message is coming from. This nonsense is no different than their slander of John McCain in the 2000 primaries, the Swifboating of John Kerry in 2004, or the numerous attacks they've leveled on opponents of their policies. I guess when you don't have a basis to argue the issue, you might as well stoop to the lowest rung possible and kill the messenger.
Although few of McLellan's comments are new, it is so incredibly damning for them to have come from a former member of Bush's inner circle. To hear these allegations from a man that was, between 1999 and 2008, the quintessential "Bushie" must lend credibility to his claims. McLellan's words also reiterate the recounts of other former Bush administration officials such as George Tenet, Richard Clarke, and Douglas Feith; men who were condemned by the Bush administration, but now have their criticisms validated by the memoir of yet another former staffer. The only difference is that this time it comes from a man with that had direct access to the President.
Not surprisingly, the Bush attack machine is responding by doing what it does best - attack the messenger. From Karl Rove to Dan Bartlett to Ari Fleischer, the only comments you heard in response to McLellan's book yesterday were attacks on his character and on him personally. Just this morning Bob Dole called McLellan a "miserable creature." Unfortunately, this has become the Bush (and Republican) motto when it comes to defending itself. Rather than discuss the charges of the book (or the issue at hand), they attack who the message is coming from. This nonsense is no different than their slander of John McCain in the 2000 primaries, the Swifboating of John Kerry in 2004, or the numerous attacks they've leveled on opponents of their policies. I guess when you don't have a basis to argue the issue, you might as well stoop to the lowest rung possible and kill the messenger.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Please tell me all Repub's don't think like this
Uber-conservative commentator Charlie Sykes made the argument in his blog that because of smoking bans, more people are dying of drunk driving. *scratches head* This logic is so baffling I'll just let the column speak for itself. Here's a gem that you can sift through:
I'm only wondering if this is really the new Repub. talking point to combat the smoking bans. I mean c'mon, seriously?
By comparing data from a variety of locations around the United States where laws requiring smoke-free bars exist with locations without bans, economists Scott Adams and Chad Cotti found a relative increase in fatalities caused by drunk driving following ban enactment.
While the results at first seemed surprising to Adams, a UWM assistant professor of economics, and Cotti, now at the University of South Carolina, literature on consumer behavior suggests an explanation: Smokers are willing to drive longer distances to an establishment that allows smoking.
I'm only wondering if this is really the new Repub. talking point to combat the smoking bans. I mean c'mon, seriously?
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Obama Demonstrates a Commitment to LGBT Issues
Dale Carpenter, in his article in The Bay Area Reporter articulates perfectly what makes Obama the superior candidate when it comes to LGBT issues. While Obama and Sen. Clinton are similar in their stances and legislative abilities, Obama soars over HRC when it comes to his commitment to advancing gay equality. Carpenter writes:
Neither Obama nor Clinton is perfect on this score. Obama campaigned last fall with a homophobic minister. Both hesitated when confronted with the remarks of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace that DADT is justified because homosexuality is immoral. As if testing the political winds, they denounced Pace only after Sen. John Warner (R-VA) flatly declared that homosexuality is not immoral.
Nevertheless, Obama speaks movingly of gay equality, and not just before gay audiences. He has raised the issue among white farmers and in black churches, where the message is both unwelcome and needed.
Hillary Clinton, by contrast, rarely raises the issue on her own, never does so before unfriendly audiences, and seems reluctant even to say the word “gay.”
Obama “gets it” in a way that no previous candidate for president has. Part of this is generational, but it is nonetheless real.
On commitment: strong advantage to Obama.
The Next VP?
Assuming Barack Obama ends up with the Democratic nomination, the next question to be answered is "Who will be Obama's running mate?" How about Jim Webb? He had an interesting interview with NPR this week, and among other topics, they discuss a possible VP nomination. Personally, I love the idea. Webb represents strong military experience, centrist appeal, and "blue collar" Democrats. He is also someone that is part of the new Democratic party (as opposed to old, establishment Dems that have been the party leaders for the past two decades) in that he understands the diversity of the US and the challenges the country faces in a 2008 mindset.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Get Well Teddy
Off to the side of my blog, I have always displayed a picture of former Senator and presidential nominee Robert F. Kennedy, a man whom I have always idolized and held in the highest regard. His brother, Senator Ted Kennedy, has served the country in the same spirit that he served. The news today of Sen. Ted Kennedy's malignant brain tumor has been both shocking and disheartening to all Americans. Since 1962, Sen. Kennedy and his family have fought for those in our country that have not had the voice to fight for themselves. He has advocated for children, the underserved, healthcare for all citizens, and innumerable other causes which have made the United States a better place. His undying spirit and commanding oratory have been staples in the US Senate over the past 40 plus years.
Beyond politics, Sen. Kennedy's distinguished honor has gained him the respect and love of Senators and Representives, regardless of political party. Colleagues and citizens alike have described him as a man of great courage and steadfast dedication, a man that is willing to cross party lines to compromise in order to pass legislation that would otherwise remain stuck in Congress. Sen. Kennedy has become a living institution in the Senate. His public service has been unmatched in American history. On this day I hope for Sen. Kennedy's healthy recovery and pray that we all can once again see him advocating for the people he has so diligently served in his term as a US Senator.
Get well Teddy.
Beyond politics, Sen. Kennedy's distinguished honor has gained him the respect and love of Senators and Representives, regardless of political party. Colleagues and citizens alike have described him as a man of great courage and steadfast dedication, a man that is willing to cross party lines to compromise in order to pass legislation that would otherwise remain stuck in Congress. Sen. Kennedy has become a living institution in the Senate. His public service has been unmatched in American history. On this day I hope for Sen. Kennedy's healthy recovery and pray that we all can once again see him advocating for the people he has so diligently served in his term as a US Senator.
Get well Teddy.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
The State of the Primary
In two words, it's over. And when you look at what has been said by pundits and experts over the last two months, it's really not very surprising. With a few exceptions, all of the contests that have taken place since Wisconsin and Hawaii have come down just like the experts have said they would (and, coincidentally, the Obama campaign). Following election night here in the Badger state, I said that to get back in the race HRC needed to win, and win big, in places like Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. While she did pull out victories in each of these states(well, a pseudo-victory in Texas), her margins have not been great enough. With the exception of Pennsylvania, a state that has a Democratic Party structure conducive to HRC, she has not made up any substantial ground on the lead that Obama has built. Even on primary night in Ohio and Texas, the delegate count the following morning stood with virtually the same distance between HRC and Obama.
This pattern has got to be troubling for her campaign, and as Barack inches closer and closer to reaching the magic number of 2,025 delegates, HRC's margin for error grows razor thin. While the prognostications in March have had many of the primary contests accurately laid out, the results have now validated these predictions. Seeing the elections that have taken place over the past month, a month in which Obama has been held to standards Zeus could not meet, HRC's campaign is all but over. Granted, there is no official nominee yet and Obama has not yet gotten the required delegates, but the electoral math makes HRC's task nearly insurmountable at this point.
Oh, and could we please get back to discussing the issues!!
This pattern has got to be troubling for her campaign, and as Barack inches closer and closer to reaching the magic number of 2,025 delegates, HRC's margin for error grows razor thin. While the prognostications in March have had many of the primary contests accurately laid out, the results have now validated these predictions. Seeing the elections that have taken place over the past month, a month in which Obama has been held to standards Zeus could not meet, HRC's campaign is all but over. Granted, there is no official nominee yet and Obama has not yet gotten the required delegates, but the electoral math makes HRC's task nearly insurmountable at this point.
Oh, and could we please get back to discussing the issues!!
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Second Amendment Case Before the Supreme Court
Sitting before the US Supreme Court currently is a case that will redefine how gun control laws are enacted and enforced in this country. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the High Court is reconsidering its interpretation of the 2nd Amendment for the first time in 68 years. Regardless of your stance on the issue, I urge you to read more about the case and understand the issues being addressed. Here is one link (of the many that are available) with information about the case: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/court-agrees-to-rule-on-gun-case/
The case has been argued, and there will likely be a ruling sometime in the near future. So what should happen? Without turning this into my senior thesis paper, I'll share a few thoughts. As much as I usually carry the banner for curtailing the prevailance and use of firearms, the DC gun ban is simply too broad. The law does not provide any exceptions for off-duty law enforcement officers. It also does not allow for any provisions by which citizens can protect their homes. While a similar law with such provisions (or close to) would be useful and much more reasonable, the case before SCOTUS presents a law that is not narrowly tailored enough to pass its constitutional requirements. I applaud the District of Columbia for its intentions, and indeed I agree with their motives, but they must provide a more through law. After the case is ruled upon (most likely coming down against the District), they should reexamine the law and draft one that provides the necessary exceptions and provisions, thereby eliminating the claims that the law is too broad-sweeping.
I am guessing the Court's decision will end up somewhere around 5-4 (Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy), and hopefully their opinion is not a blanket rejection of DC's attempt at decreasing gun violence within the city. If that happens, my hope is that the city revises the law to take into account the situations in which an all-out ban on firearms (unless unloaded and disassembled) is unreasonable. A law such as that could pave the way for other cities to follow, eventually changing cultural attitudes in the US and lowering the number of guns in society.
The case has been argued, and there will likely be a ruling sometime in the near future. So what should happen? Without turning this into my senior thesis paper, I'll share a few thoughts. As much as I usually carry the banner for curtailing the prevailance and use of firearms, the DC gun ban is simply too broad. The law does not provide any exceptions for off-duty law enforcement officers. It also does not allow for any provisions by which citizens can protect their homes. While a similar law with such provisions (or close to) would be useful and much more reasonable, the case before SCOTUS presents a law that is not narrowly tailored enough to pass its constitutional requirements. I applaud the District of Columbia for its intentions, and indeed I agree with their motives, but they must provide a more through law. After the case is ruled upon (most likely coming down against the District), they should reexamine the law and draft one that provides the necessary exceptions and provisions, thereby eliminating the claims that the law is too broad-sweeping.
I am guessing the Court's decision will end up somewhere around 5-4 (Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy), and hopefully their opinion is not a blanket rejection of DC's attempt at decreasing gun violence within the city. If that happens, my hope is that the city revises the law to take into account the situations in which an all-out ban on firearms (unless unloaded and disassembled) is unreasonable. A law such as that could pave the way for other cities to follow, eventually changing cultural attitudes in the US and lowering the number of guns in society.
Pennsylvania Primary
In the past month of Primary season in what is becoming the Batton Death March to the White House, the Democratic Primary has descended into a spiral of ridiculousness, rivaled only by the writing on CSI. Upon completion of this post, I will follow up shortly with one of substance, dealing with an issue of real significance (unlike the bickering that has been going on in the Keystone state). However, I feel it is necessary to point out the absurdity that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (although to a lesser degree) have brought to the campaign for the presidency. It has gotten to the point where I have simply lost interest. When I hear of the latest "scandal" or "attack," the story registers no emotional value and I sort-of nod my head at the TV, my eyes a bit glazed over and a blank stare crossing my face. Is this a bit cynical of me? Perhaps. But in reality, this campaign has strayed so far from anything resembling a substantive debate that it doesn't deserve my attention (or anyone elses for that matter) at this point. The fact of the matter is that Obama remains clearly ahead, and barring an apocalyptic collapse, he will be the next nominee for President from the Democratic Party. If HRC wants to contest this, fine. But until the two candidates start talking about the things that matter, like the issues involved in small town poverty or health care or the country's direction, I will choose to occupy my time with something of greater value (watching old reruns of Crossfire perhaps?).
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
New Campaign Thoughts
First of all, sorry for having not updated the blog recently. I had an unfortunate incident with my laptop and had to order a new one, temporarily cutting me off from the world. I am also just getting over a nasty case of the flu which put me out of commission for the past 5 or so days.
Sitting on the couch yesterday drinking orange juice and sucking on cough drops, I got no shortage of election coverage to watch and piece together. After seeing the results come in, a few questions came to mind. Are HRC's negative attacks finally working (as disgusting and inaccurate as they may be)? What do the results say about the direction of the race? Does HRC really now had the momentum, as she claims? To some degree, there are no definitive answers to these questions, but I'll take a crack at finding them
Overall, I don't see last night as nearly as big of a victory as the HRC campaign proclaimed it. Granted, she won three out of the four primaries in play. However, when this all pans out, she will be behind in the delegate count by about the same as she was prior to March 4th. And in a race that is this close, this is what matters. Not to mention the fact that the Obama campaign predicted that they would lose the states they did (in addition to their strikingly accurate predictions throughout the rest of the campaign). Also, there is no denying that, as has been the case in dozens of other states, HRC had a huge early lead in the Texas and Ohio polls and was forced to hold on in the last few weeks as Obama closed the gaps. So what do the results say about the race? Quite simply, not much. HRC held serve in the states she was supposed to do well in, yet she still remains behind in the delegate count. After the WI primary I said that HRC had to win big on March 4th to have a chance. I stand by that prediction, and I don't believe she did what she had to in order to have a realistic chance to pull ahead of Obama.
One thing that last night did tell us is that HRC, for better or worse, will not go down without scratching and clawing for every vote. While I certainly admire her drive and persistance, at some point she has to stop being such a typical Clinton and see the picture beyond her own candidacy. What I mean by this is I worry that because her incredibly high personal ambtion (as well as Bill's), she won't see the damaging effect that going to the DNC Convention without a nominee could have. Her unwillingness to accept defeat (which is often a good characteristic) will cause the party to fracture, and the progressive movement as a whole will suffer in November.
My last point is that in the coming weeks I hope that the candidates don't continue to beat the hell out of each other. Now who knows, maybe HRC will remember how "honored" she is to be in this race and stop with the bipolar campaign strategy that came after the Texas debate. Or perhaps someone will explain to her pitbull Communications Director, Howard Wolfson, that although her viscious attack strategy may prove to be useful in the short run, eventually people will catch on and realize the mud she has been throwing has no substance to it. Either way, I really hope the weeks and months leading up to the DNC Convention don't provide more of what we've seen in the past few weeks.
Sitting on the couch yesterday drinking orange juice and sucking on cough drops, I got no shortage of election coverage to watch and piece together. After seeing the results come in, a few questions came to mind. Are HRC's negative attacks finally working (as disgusting and inaccurate as they may be)? What do the results say about the direction of the race? Does HRC really now had the momentum, as she claims? To some degree, there are no definitive answers to these questions, but I'll take a crack at finding them
Overall, I don't see last night as nearly as big of a victory as the HRC campaign proclaimed it. Granted, she won three out of the four primaries in play. However, when this all pans out, she will be behind in the delegate count by about the same as she was prior to March 4th. And in a race that is this close, this is what matters. Not to mention the fact that the Obama campaign predicted that they would lose the states they did (in addition to their strikingly accurate predictions throughout the rest of the campaign). Also, there is no denying that, as has been the case in dozens of other states, HRC had a huge early lead in the Texas and Ohio polls and was forced to hold on in the last few weeks as Obama closed the gaps. So what do the results say about the race? Quite simply, not much. HRC held serve in the states she was supposed to do well in, yet she still remains behind in the delegate count. After the WI primary I said that HRC had to win big on March 4th to have a chance. I stand by that prediction, and I don't believe she did what she had to in order to have a realistic chance to pull ahead of Obama.
One thing that last night did tell us is that HRC, for better or worse, will not go down without scratching and clawing for every vote. While I certainly admire her drive and persistance, at some point she has to stop being such a typical Clinton and see the picture beyond her own candidacy. What I mean by this is I worry that because her incredibly high personal ambtion (as well as Bill's), she won't see the damaging effect that going to the DNC Convention without a nominee could have. Her unwillingness to accept defeat (which is often a good characteristic) will cause the party to fracture, and the progressive movement as a whole will suffer in November.
My last point is that in the coming weeks I hope that the candidates don't continue to beat the hell out of each other. Now who knows, maybe HRC will remember how "honored" she is to be in this race and stop with the bipolar campaign strategy that came after the Texas debate. Or perhaps someone will explain to her pitbull Communications Director, Howard Wolfson, that although her viscious attack strategy may prove to be useful in the short run, eventually people will catch on and realize the mud she has been throwing has no substance to it. Either way, I really hope the weeks and months leading up to the DNC Convention don't provide more of what we've seen in the past few weeks.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
This John McCain thing...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html
So I turn on the TV today to find out that the New York Times ran a 3000 word story today alleging that John McCain, the presumptive Republican Party nominee for President, was involved in a romantic affair with Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. While this is extremely troubling (and debilitating for his campaign) if true, at this point it seems best to withhold judgement given the lack of details that have surfaced thus far. The NYT article was run largely based on the claims of anonymous sources, and given the fact that there has been little corroboration yet, it is too early to tell the validity of the story. If the accusations prove to be true, I will be first in line to express my disappointment for Sen. McCain, but at this point there is much more information that needs to be gathered.
What is also concerning to me and what seems to be bringing this story down is the nature in which the article was run. Rather than focusing on the possible lobbyist ties (which are very valid campaign criticisms), the NYT led with the "juicy" topic, the sex. While this part of the story may or may not be true, the absence of a rock-solid case simply has emboldened the Rush Limbaugh's of the world. It has fired up neo-conservatives and given them all the more reason to attack the NYT. This is frustrating for those of us who see the NYT as one of the best news sources in the country. We cannot defend such media sources nearly as well when they have the appearance of tabloid paparazzo's chasing political elites around to capture the secrets of their private lives. My only hope, in this sense, is that they do have enough factual basis for this story, and their claims are true.
On the other, if the NYT is correct, it will be disheartening to see someone that has stood for reform and "maverick" politics brought down as simply another public official in the pockets of lobbyists. Sen. McCain, as is well known, has made a career on being a devoted public servant and beyond that, a good and decent person. He has given more to the country than most people would be willing to offer. Despite my disagreements with him on a number of policy issues, he has always been someone that I look at with respect as a person and a professional. For this reason, I hope the claims of the NYT turn out to be false.
In short, it is too early to make judgements on this story. We need to wait until all the facts come to light. Only then can the public accurately decifer how much this story should affect Sen. McCain's reputation.
So I turn on the TV today to find out that the New York Times ran a 3000 word story today alleging that John McCain, the presumptive Republican Party nominee for President, was involved in a romantic affair with Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. While this is extremely troubling (and debilitating for his campaign) if true, at this point it seems best to withhold judgement given the lack of details that have surfaced thus far. The NYT article was run largely based on the claims of anonymous sources, and given the fact that there has been little corroboration yet, it is too early to tell the validity of the story. If the accusations prove to be true, I will be first in line to express my disappointment for Sen. McCain, but at this point there is much more information that needs to be gathered.
What is also concerning to me and what seems to be bringing this story down is the nature in which the article was run. Rather than focusing on the possible lobbyist ties (which are very valid campaign criticisms), the NYT led with the "juicy" topic, the sex. While this part of the story may or may not be true, the absence of a rock-solid case simply has emboldened the Rush Limbaugh's of the world. It has fired up neo-conservatives and given them all the more reason to attack the NYT. This is frustrating for those of us who see the NYT as one of the best news sources in the country. We cannot defend such media sources nearly as well when they have the appearance of tabloid paparazzo's chasing political elites around to capture the secrets of their private lives. My only hope, in this sense, is that they do have enough factual basis for this story, and their claims are true.
On the other, if the NYT is correct, it will be disheartening to see someone that has stood for reform and "maverick" politics brought down as simply another public official in the pockets of lobbyists. Sen. McCain, as is well known, has made a career on being a devoted public servant and beyond that, a good and decent person. He has given more to the country than most people would be willing to offer. Despite my disagreements with him on a number of policy issues, he has always been someone that I look at with respect as a person and a professional. For this reason, I hope the claims of the NYT turn out to be false.
In short, it is too early to make judgements on this story. We need to wait until all the facts come to light. Only then can the public accurately decifer how much this story should affect Sen. McCain's reputation.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
WI Primary Night
As the numbers have come in tonight, it's become very clear that it's been a big night for Barack Obama. In addition to piling up a 17 point win in a race that Hillary Clinton was hoping to keep around 5 points, Barack continued to increase his support in almost every measureable demographic. Most significantly, he continues his streak of primary wins going into March 4th. That means the next two weeks will bring only more talk of his momentum and HRC's struggles.
Tonight's results also put Hillary into a tough position. She not only has to run the table in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania, she has to do it in a BIG way. At this point (and I'll be the first to admit that there's still a lot of time left), she simply can't pull it off. Let's assume she wins in Pennsylvania, largely due to the deep roots she has with the Democratic political machine. That leaves Ohio and Texas. Even if she can hold onto her lead in Ohio, she is currently running dead even in Texas. This simply won't cut it, especially given the fact that there has been a lot of talk tonight by pundits about how Ohio could very easily fall in line with Wisconsin's results given the similarities in the makeup of the voting populations. Even if she hold's off Barack's charge, she cannot simply win 51-49 or 53-47. She needs to win big! And by big I mean 20 points or so. This is the only way she'll be able to get the delegates needed to get back into the race, and I just don't see this happening.
So where does the HRC campaign go from here? Now that is a good question. She has tried to be positive. It hasn't worked. She's tried going negative. Voters haven't responded. So what's left? HRC staffers are claiming that their "comparative" strategy (read: negative attacks) was the only reason that their loss in Wisconsin wasn't 20 or 25 points. Although that's an interesting theory, it doesn't seem to hold much water. Going into election day, polls had predictions varying from Hillary leading by 5ish to Barack leading by 20. Seeing as the spread will end up being around 17ish, it doesn't make sense to claim that the attacks worked. Barack won, and he won big. There's no two ways around it. This means that the HRC campaign has some serious soul searching to do in order to come up with some strategy to pull of a string of decisive victories. Anything short of that on March 4th, and Barack Obama could emerge as the Democratic nominee.
Tonight's results also put Hillary into a tough position. She not only has to run the table in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania, she has to do it in a BIG way. At this point (and I'll be the first to admit that there's still a lot of time left), she simply can't pull it off. Let's assume she wins in Pennsylvania, largely due to the deep roots she has with the Democratic political machine. That leaves Ohio and Texas. Even if she can hold onto her lead in Ohio, she is currently running dead even in Texas. This simply won't cut it, especially given the fact that there has been a lot of talk tonight by pundits about how Ohio could very easily fall in line with Wisconsin's results given the similarities in the makeup of the voting populations. Even if she hold's off Barack's charge, she cannot simply win 51-49 or 53-47. She needs to win big! And by big I mean 20 points or so. This is the only way she'll be able to get the delegates needed to get back into the race, and I just don't see this happening.
So where does the HRC campaign go from here? Now that is a good question. She has tried to be positive. It hasn't worked. She's tried going negative. Voters haven't responded. So what's left? HRC staffers are claiming that their "comparative" strategy (read: negative attacks) was the only reason that their loss in Wisconsin wasn't 20 or 25 points. Although that's an interesting theory, it doesn't seem to hold much water. Going into election day, polls had predictions varying from Hillary leading by 5ish to Barack leading by 20. Seeing as the spread will end up being around 17ish, it doesn't make sense to claim that the attacks worked. Barack won, and he won big. There's no two ways around it. This means that the HRC campaign has some serious soul searching to do in order to come up with some strategy to pull of a string of decisive victories. Anything short of that on March 4th, and Barack Obama could emerge as the Democratic nominee.
Go Vote!! (if you haven't already)
I stumbled on this quote from Thomas Jefferson and thought it was fitting for election day here in Wisconsin:
"The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes."
At the crucial point in American history at which we rest, believe that the republican spirit of this country isn't dead and that the future of our democracy lies in our collective hands. It is up to us, the people, to ensure that we put responsible people into power to watch over the rights we cherish. So with that in mind, whomever you support, make sure you get out and fulfill your civic duty by voting in the primary today.
"The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes."
At the crucial point in American history at which we rest, believe that the republican spirit of this country isn't dead and that the future of our democracy lies in our collective hands. It is up to us, the people, to ensure that we put responsible people into power to watch over the rights we cherish. So with that in mind, whomever you support, make sure you get out and fulfill your civic duty by voting in the primary today.
Monday, February 18, 2008
More Negative Attacks from HRC
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-campaign.html
Does the Clinton campaign have any real substance to criticize Obama on or are we just going to see more of these meaningless attacks as long as she continues to falter? They are clearly trying to bring Barack down into the muck of her negative attacks. Unfortunately for HRC, people are smart enough to see through this nonsense to find the things that matter in this campaign, namely seeking ways to move forward as a country in order to solve our problems collectively.
Does the Clinton campaign have any real substance to criticize Obama on or are we just going to see more of these meaningless attacks as long as she continues to falter? They are clearly trying to bring Barack down into the muck of her negative attacks. Unfortunately for HRC, people are smart enough to see through this nonsense to find the things that matter in this campaign, namely seeking ways to move forward as a country in order to solve our problems collectively.
Amateur Hour at MJS
Apparently the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal couldn't find a better picture of Wisconsin's Lt. Governor from the Founders Day Gala than this one: http://xbeyondx.blogspot.com/2008/02/journal-sentinel-seems-not-to-like-lt.html Give me a break! This kind of a move from MJS is, at best, amateur and unprofessional.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Wisconsin Primary
With the Wisconsin Democratic Primary set to take place in two days, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been spending a significant amount of time in the state. HRC, however, has shown how desperate her campaign is by going negative on, of all topics, her challenge to debate Barack for the 5329th time.
Here is her ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzGbj_ERlJ0&feature=related
And here is the ad parody that shows how ridiculous her claims are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3QaUwLNN5g
As Obama continues to roll up victories going into March 4, it will be interesting to see how HRC continues to rely on dirty, old campaign politics to stop Obama's ever-growing momentum. It couldn't be more apparent that in order to turn the page on the current page in American political culture that has divided us into arguably the most polarized period since the Civil War, we need a candidate whose vision lifts us above the fray of the politics of fear; a candidate who inspires us to bring the US back to the level of greatness it has seen. That candidate is Barack Obama, and on Tuesday join the masses in saying "Yes we can!"
Here is her ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzGbj_ERlJ0&feature=related
And here is the ad parody that shows how ridiculous her claims are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3QaUwLNN5g
As Obama continues to roll up victories going into March 4, it will be interesting to see how HRC continues to rely on dirty, old campaign politics to stop Obama's ever-growing momentum. It couldn't be more apparent that in order to turn the page on the current page in American political culture that has divided us into arguably the most polarized period since the Civil War, we need a candidate whose vision lifts us above the fray of the politics of fear; a candidate who inspires us to bring the US back to the level of greatness it has seen. That candidate is Barack Obama, and on Tuesday join the masses in saying "Yes we can!"
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Hello blogosphere
I just created my own blog so I thought I'd use this first post to share a little about what I hope to use this blog for. One of the passions in my life is political policy. More specifically, I believe in fighting so that everyone has the same opportunities to succeed and find fulfillment in whatever path their lives take them down. To often the voices of these historically underserved and disenfranchised citizens go unheard and unnoticed. One of the purposes of my blog is going to be to share my thoughts and opinions on current events that relate to issues like health care, public education, racial equality, LGBT equality, and poverty. I would also like to use this blog to comment on politics in general.
Although I will certainly use my blog for other reasons as well, this will be its main focus. I will close this first post with one of my favorite quotes from my favorite leader, Robert F. Kennedy.
"We all struggle to transcend the cruelties and follies of mankind. That struggle will not be won by standing aloof and pointing a finger; it will be won by action, by men and women who commit their every resource of mind and body to the education and improvement and help of their fellow man."
Although I will certainly use my blog for other reasons as well, this will be its main focus. I will close this first post with one of my favorite quotes from my favorite leader, Robert F. Kennedy.
"We all struggle to transcend the cruelties and follies of mankind. That struggle will not be won by standing aloof and pointing a finger; it will be won by action, by men and women who commit their every resource of mind and body to the education and improvement and help of their fellow man."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
