Oh, boy. Yesterday I thought this year’s presidential campaign would be a snoozefest from now on, but was I wrong! The hits just keep coming!
MSNBC’s Athena Jones is reporting that Rev. Jeremiah Wright managed to crawl out from under Barack Obama’s bus long enough to sing his praises at Houston’s Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church today:
“The Lord turned the ordinary into the extraordinary. Y’all just saw it this past week. It was on national television,” Wright said to applause. “This ordinary boy just might be, come November, the 4th, this ordinary boy from a single parent home with a daddy from Kenya and a mama from Kansas. This ordinary boy just might be the first president in the history of the United States to have a black woman sleeping at 1600 Pennsylvania, legally.”
You think the good reverend was referring to White House guests during the Kennedy administration? Okay, probably not. But depending who you talk to, God’s either a Republican or a Democrat with a curiously mean generosity streak. The Wall Street Journal says Quinnipiac’s Peter A. Brown thinks God’s with the GOP.
No Republican in his right mind will acknowledge it, but Hurricane Gustav affords the GOP a political opportunity that could boost Sen. John McCain’s odds of winning the White House.
“I was just thinking, this Gustav is proof that there is a God in Heaven.” Moore said with a chuckle in a televised interview.
“That it would actually be on its way to New Orleans for Day one of the Republican convention up in the twin cities at the top of the Mississippi River,” Moore said, in an interview with MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, on Countdown.
“That just demonstrates that God is on our side,” Fowler added, according to a video posted on YouTube under the headline: “Fowler Fouls: Hurricane is God’s Favor To Democrats.”
Considering the potential for destruction Gustav represents, I feel comfortable saying, screw all of you. The people facing the wrath of yet another devastating hurricane with no confidence in their government’s commitment to their safety and well being deserve better than the lot of you. And whatever God’s plan, I’m sure neither He, nor the weary, frightened, beleaguered residents in the path of Hurricane Gustav appreciate your ill-timed, self-important, pitiful attempts at bad humor. You should be ashamed, but then, that would be expecting too much from you.
In an unrelated note, just to clear our mental palates of the bad taste left in our minds by the above, Seacoast Online examines Barack Obama’s “just words” in his speeches and comes to some interesting conclusions. Given what we know about his running mate’s history with plagiarism, this could be a problem.
*I swiched out the video because, well, I just had to.
Barack Obama may have thought he had put Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s famously stated dilemma behind him, but he was wrong. A January 4, 2008 story in the Wahington Post quoted Jackson, The Younger:
“The natural reminder here is O.J. [Simpson] — how does an African American candidate attack a white woman?” said Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), a fellow Chicagoan whose father ran for president twice in the 1980s but was never as close as Obama is now to securing the Democratic nomination.
Yahoo News has noticed Obuhbuh’s reluctance to engage:
Barack Obama seems to have only one problem with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for vice president: She holds the same positions as John McCain, the GOPpresidential candidate who tapped her.
That may seem like a “well, duh” observation on his part, but Obama has tiptoed carefully around Palin as he tries to attract female voters. So far he has criticized her only for her ties to McCain.
“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.
The “she’s not experienced” argument is unlikely to work, no matter who makes it. Bloomberg News says even fellow Alaskans are skeptical:
“She’s not qualified, she doesn’t have the judgment, to be next in line to the president of the United States,” Larry Persily, who until June worked in the governor’s Washington office as a congressional liaison, said in a phone interview yesterday.
“I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he’d bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.”
While America plays, “he’s more experienced, no she’s more experienced” games, Hurricane Gustav is illuminating a judgment gap between the presidential candidates.
White House hopefulJohn McCain urged all Americans to reach out and help those caught in the path of deadly Hurricane Gustav Sunday after touring an emergency response center in the coastal state of Mississippi.
“America needs all of us to do what American have always done in times of disaster and challenge, and that is join together and help our fellow citizens,” McCain told reporters.
The other promises to ask his donors:
Obama said Sunday he will mobilize his vast donor list to send money or volunteer to help with recovery efforts.
“We can activate an email list of a couple million people who want to give back,” Obama told reporters after attending church in Lima, Ohio.
Notice, one guy travelled to the region, the other:
Obama said was planning to “stay clear of the area until things have settled down and then we’ll probably try to figure out how we can be as helpful as possible.”
One guy gets it:
“I pledge that tomorrow night, and if necessary, throughout our convention if necessary, to act as Americans not Republicans, because America needs us now no matter whether we are Republican or Democrat,” McCain said.
The other, is Barack Obama:
“We just hope that by the time this storm hits land that it has dissipated somewhat. Right now that doesn’t appear to be the case.”
I’m not a Republican and it would probably take an Act of God to make me vote for him, but right now, the old man’s got it goin’ on.
This is the second in a series of posts about the reasons for my disillusionment with the Democratic party and the way this nomination process played out in the words of the people involved. Today, Howard Dean.
Speech to California Democratic party convention, March 15, 2003:
I am Howard Dean and I here to represent the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.
“Not only are we going to New Hampshire …, we’re going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we’re going to California and Texas and New York,” he said. “And we’re going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we’re going to Washington, D.C. To take back the White House. YEAHHHH!!!.”
From Democracy For America on Barack Obama being named one of the initial “Dean’s Dozen” on May 12, 2004:
Several months ago I put out a call to the hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists who had worked on my campaign to run for office themselves. Hundreds of volunteers answered this call. Our new organization – Democracy for America – is dedicated to using its resources to support those candidates in their fight to take our country back from the right-wing conservatives who dominate our government. Today, Democracy for America announces the Dean Dozen – twelve diverse candidates that represent the spirit of grassroots democracy.
edit
Barack Obama for United States Senate from Illinois. In the race to regain control of the U.S. Senate, Democrats have few better chances to pick up a seat than in Illinois. DFA volunteers all over Illinois helped Obama win his primary, now it’s time to help him win the general. Stay tuned: I will be on the trail with Barack soon. www.obamaforillinois.com
The Internet is the most empowering and democratizing invention since the printing press.”
The Washington Blade reports on March 28, 2008 that in a deposition regarding the case of Donald Hitchcock, a gay man fired from the DNC for poor job performance, Dean blames Donna Brazile for deteriorating relationships with the LGBT community:
Dean said some “influential individuals” within the DNC Black Caucus, such as Donna Brazile, opposed the plan because it was seen as “an affront to the civil rights movement.”
edit
“I wanted equal representation for gay and lesbian Americans,” he said, “and I wanted to achieve it in a way that wasn’t offensive to the history of the civil rights movement.”
“Well, I think the candidates have got to understand that they have an obligation to our country to unify. Somebody’s going to lose this race with 49.8 percent of the vote. And that person has got to pull their supporters in behind the nominee.
“We are strong enough to struggle, and disagree, be angry, disappointed
and still come together at the end of the day and be united. The reason we
are able to do this is because all of us, together in our passion and our
emotion realize that this race is not about me, it’s not about Hillary
Clinton, Barack Obama, the RBC or the reporters who are here to cover the
event. It’s about restoring our great country.
“If it’s very very close, they [the superdelegates] will do what they want anyway,” said Mr Dean.
“I think the race is going to come down to the perception in the last six or eight races of who the best opponent for McCain will be. I do not think in the long run it will come down to the popular vote or anything else.”
“I’m not sure all of them are Clinton supporters,” he said. “I think some of them are having fun at the Democrats’ expense. I think shouting through somebody’s speech is low-class.”
“If you look at folks of color, even women, they’re more successful in the Democratic Party than they are in the white — excuse me — in the Republican Party.”
“Looking out from this podium tonight, I see this diverse assembly of Democrats as a testament to the strength and unity of our party and the fruition of our 50-state strategy,” the party chairman told the throng as he gaveled the convention to session.
I don’t think we have a unity problem at all. I think there’s a few people who can’t be satisfied, but we’ve got some very happy delegates with our ticket.
This is the first in a series of posts reflecting the views of people responsible for pushing me from the Democratic party, in their own words, with links.
Last year, following the Supreme Court intervention in the 2000 presidential campaign, I called my friend and Bush chief strategist Karl Rove to wish him well.”
”I call Republicans because I can talk outside the box with them,” she said. ”I can talk with Democrats, but when I talk with Republicans, I learn a lot more.”
“Howard Dean has the power to empower a new generation of activists, to bring more people into the political process and to turn more people on,” Brazile said. “Some voters were very uncomfortable with Howard Dean as a candidate. But I think they will rally to him as a cheerleader for democracy.”
I live to be on Bill Clinton’s coattails.” She said she envisioned bookstore appearances with “the first black president (as Clinton has been metaphorically called) … and his little sister right there on the side.”
This is a new moment to identify and recruit better messengers. Perhaps it’s time to tap into the “Obama” factor: Scour statehouses for young, energetic, inspiring, and emerging leaders with the ability to connect the head and heart. Too many of the old Democratic guard have stayed in Washington, D.C., too long to fully recognize how most Americans live their lives.
On Thursday night President Bush spoke to the nation from my city. I am not a Republican. I did not vote for George W. Bush – in fact, I worked pretty hard against him in 2000 and 2004. But on Thursday night, after watching him speak from the heart, I could not have been prouder of the president and the plan he outlined to empower those who lost everything and to rebuild the Gulf Coast.
As we begin to contemplate the calendar for 2012, and the rules that will govern that process, both major parties must craft a system that makes sense for voters and candidates. We can begin by setting a reasonable starting date — I suggest the time when the snow gives way to tulips and daffodils. We can make sure the nominating schedule does not unfairly favor the rock stars of politics. And we must make sure the campaign finance laws allow more than just the candidates with deep pockets and ties to big donors to be competitive.
I can understand his frustration at this moment, but, look, he shouldn’t take out all his pain on Barack Obama. It’s time that they regroup, figure out what Hillary needs to do to get her campaign back on track. It sounds like sour grapes coming from the former Commander-in-Chief, someone that many Democrats hold in high esteem. For him to go after Obama using “fairy tale,” calling him a “kid,” as he did last week, it’s an insult. And I tell you, as an African-American, I find his words and his tone to be very depressing.
“Despite Obama’s impressive victories in February, Clinton’s comeback is based on sowing political seeds of doubt,” said Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist and one of nearly 800 party leaders known as superdelegates for their ability to determine the nomination. “In order to clinch the nomination, he must anticipate the worst attacks ever.”…
edit
“If these attacks are contrasts based on policy differences, there is no need to stop the race or halt the debate,” Brazile said. “But, if this is more division, more diversion from the issues and more of the same politics of personal destruction, chairman Dean and other should be on standby.”
“He is culturally both black and white,” she told me. “Why is it that everyone has all of a sudden made Barack Obama the blackest black man on the planet? Malcolm X would be jealous of Obama at this point.”
“Thanks for the joyful email. Like most of the other pro Clinton emails, I have now put them in a special folder called ‘tales from the gutter.
Stay positive and remember if she wins, you will need Obama supporters and donors. So please stop throwing stones. Give her the support now and stop sending frivolous emails.”
Do you know how many undeclared supers are now just turned off by people like you? Do you understand you’re hurting her and not promoting Hillary? Perhaps that explains why a candidate like Obama has raised $40 million in one month. You don’t have to e-mail me again.
And also:
I just sent Hillary a private e-mail telling her that supporters like you are destroying her candidacy.
Blacks have been deeply wounded by the duplicity of the Clintons . Now, you may not like it or agree. But as a black person who helped saved the Clinton presidency, please just respect what I am saying. [emphasis added] Again, you disagree. But, I honestly believe the wounds will not heal. It’s personal and the Clintons have shown their darker demons. [emphasis added] Now, I will end it here. I was Al Gore’s Campaign Manager. Let the buck stop here. If I make a decision to go with Obama, people read it as Al Gore hates the Clintons. So, I stay above the bull and do not take bull from the Clintons or the Obamas or the McCains. I don’t owe anybody a dime. And if I counted who has helped me since 2000, it’s Republican men and not Democrats.
Well, Lou, I have worked on a lot of Democratic campaigns, and I respect Paul. But, Paul, you’re looking at the old coalition. A new Democratic coalition is younger. It is more urban, as well as suburban, and we don’t have to just rely on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics. We need to look at the Democratic Party, expand the party, expand the base and not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Honestly, this is the 9th email today, so I believe you’re ready to not only
destroy Roe versus Wade, voting rights, civil liberties and civil rights.
Perhaps adding trillions more to the deficits through non stop tax cuts to
the wealthy and 100 more years in Iraq.
Yes, please join Rush and McCain asap. The train has left. Catch it.
Please don’t send these emails to working people like myself. Notice you
sent it to my campus address. I am a working class person. Can you find
someone who drinks latte?
As of today, I am not going to respond to any more anti American, Anti Democratic emails. Have a nice day.
I am sorry because you are sincere, but the Hillary forces are uncivil, repugnant and vile. When you come up for air and would like to email a person who cares about America and not just a personality, I will respond.
“My momma taught me to play by the rules and respect those rules. My mother taught me, and I’m sure your mother taught you, that when you decide to change the rules, middle of the game, end of the game, that is referred to as cheatin.’” — Donna Brazile to former Michigan Gov. Jim Blanchard, who was making the case for the Clinton campaign to get 73 delegates out of Michigan with 55 for uncommitted.
“What’s clear is much of this so called rage is being stirred not by Hillary, but those pretending to be her supporters. Stop the hate. You have totally disrespected the Senator with your emails. Stop the hate. Not sure if you know, but we are keeping copies of all these emails in the archives. Yes, you are not going to get away with pretending to be for Hillary. She is a leader of the Dem party.”
It seems that many pro-Hillary bloggers are in the process of re-evaluating. What do we do now? Many of us are not at all interested in promoting Obama, he has more than enough cheerleaders as it is. As far as exposing him goes, Lord knows we’ve tried that. However, it’s obvious that those who support him do so enthusiastically and are not likely to heed any criticism, no matter how well-deserved, so, why bother? That being said, I will continue to maintain this blog for my own amusement, commenting on that which interests me, political or not. Before I get into the new season of Dancing With The Stars, though, I’m going to do a series of posts highlighting quotes from people who helped shape my disdain for, and push me from, the Democratic party. As of now, I celebrate my political Independence and welcome anyone who shares the sense of freedom with me. Hey, I’m even willing to listen to alternate points of view, but no sales pitches, please. My decision has been made, my mind’s made up. I no longer give a fuck. (Excuse my language, for once, I had to get it out.)
Bothways Barry is not getting away with his blame-shifting tendencies anymore. At least, not with Politico. They brutally illustrate the numerous instances when he deflected well earned and deserved criticisms away from himself by pointing fingers at his staff.
Just hours after his campaign issued a first statement yesterday ripping the addition of Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket, Barack Obama backed away from that statement — or at least its tone — and said that his own campaign had misrepresented him.
Obama often speaks of how important his staffers are to his bid and would be to his administration, and he’s praised them for covering for each others’ mistakes. But in the heat of the campaign, he’s publicly called them out for everything from missing an event to misrepresenting his policy positions to using his office to aid a donor.
Nooooo! Say it ain’t so! Sure sounds like him, though.
“I think that, uh, you know, campaigns start getting these, uh, hair triggers and, uh, the statement that Joe and I put out reflects our sentiments,” he said.
Unbelievable! It couldn’t be that finally, somebody is calling His High and Mighty out on one of the many things us “mythical” PUMAs have been complaining about for months, could it?
The latest disavowal of his staff’s comments on his behalf or in his name continues a tactic Obama employed repeatedly during his contentious battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
They go into the “D-Punjab” memo circulated in June of 2007, implying Clinton’s relationships with Indian-Americans were improper, and the famous “race memo” that Camp “O” released before South Carolina, claiming the entire Clinton campaign was racially insensitive. Both times, Obie blamed staff for being overzealous. Yeah, right. Democratic Underground published an article about the race memo explaining the genesis, evolution and consequences of this extremely damaging campaign tactic months ago; it’s worth a look. It was never a secret, in an earlier article, Politico reported on it, and in this story points out that Tim Russert called Obama out on it.
And when the late Tim Russert asked Obama at a Las Vegas debate about his campaign’s efforts to push the storyline that Team Clinton was stoking racial tensions, Obama said “our supporters, our staff, get overzealous. They start saying things that I would not say.”
Why should he say them when he can pay other people to and then pretend it’s their fault? The article goes into a few other examples of this passive-agressive, juvenile behavior Obama is so fond of. “I didn’t do it, he did it!” is not presidential; in fact, when you think about it, that kind of attitude is downright scary when it comes to a potential Commander-In-Chief. Some people might even say it’s pretty wimpy; I won’t, but I could. And then I could blame…you.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the Democratic standard bearers, have weighed in on Hurricane Gustav and the impending disaster facing New Orleans: y’all better hope and pray. According to the AP, they offered the still suffering people of the city devastated by Hurricane Katrina 3 years ago…not much.
Barack Obama expressed hope Saturday that the lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina three years ago would help to protect the Gulf Coast from Hurricane Gustav this time. His running mate, Joe Biden, urged people to pray that the levees in New Orleans hold.
That’s it. No helpful suggestions for contingency plans, no promises that if elected they would use the full resources available to them to assist with rebuilding, no assurances that they would make certain that the efforts to update the levee system would be accelerated in an Obama-Biden administration, just directions to hope and pray. Well, that’s not quite true. In Youngstown, Ohio today, they did tell New Orleans residents that their best bet was to get the hell out of town.
Obama and Biden visited a diner in this Youngstown suburb, an area that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton carried during her failed presidential bid. Trying to connect with those who are economically struggling, the Democratic candidates and their wives chatted with diners and told reporters that a properly orchestrated evacuation would be key to protecting the Gulf Coast.
“It wasn’t last time, and hopefully we’ve learned from that tragedy,” Obama told reporters as he left the diner, heading to a memorial service for the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the first black woman to represent Ohio in Congress. She died Aug. 20 from a brain hemorrhage caused by a ruptured aneurysm.
Way to squeeze in a funeral between campaign stops, guys.
Biden said the Gulf Coast appears better prepared for a major hurricane this time than it was for Katrina, which left New Orleans and surrounding areas submerged. He said it appeared officials had learned from Katrina, and he praised moves to make major highways one-way routes out of the storm-targeted areas.
“It looks like they’re incredibly well prepared, much better than they had before,” Biden said. “Just pray to God that those levees hold.”
I wonder if it ever dawned on these two that it might be nice to offer the anxious residents of New Orleans their prayers. Especially since it seems the Obiden team doesn’t have much in the way of practical advice to offer. But, hey, what else is new?
Every great speech has at least one unforgettable line; that’s what makes them great speeches. Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech was not about dreams; it was a forceful demand for justice. Yet we remember his summation, not the substance. John F. Kennedy was known for saying, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,” but what was the speech about? When did he give it? Why?
“Four score and seven years ago” is basically a recitation of a date, hardly memorable in and of itself, unless, as in this case, it demarcates a significant point in time. For such a short speech, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address is filled with memorable lines.
CNN is rating Barack Obama’s acceptance speech as the Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States as a classic. Network commentators rate it an “A.” Yet no one quotes a single memorable line. In my reading of the speech, the only line that jumped out at me was, “Don’t tell me…” and that’s because I’m tired of hearing him tell me what not to tell him. A Google search yielded no consensus, either.
So, what was so great about it? I admit, I only watched about 30 seconds of it, opting to read it instead. I can’t stand his voice or delivery, so once I saw that he was reading the speech from strategically placed TelePrompTers, just like he always does, I figured why not read it too? I’m tired of people grading Obama on a curve and calling it progress. If it takes a paragraph or more to explain what was so great about something, you can be sure it wasn’t all that great.
You reacted to all of Clinton’s feints and are just lucky she was never allowed to hit back, what with Nancy Pelosi pinning her arms behind her. You fell for McCain’s feints, too, and even let him lull you to sleep before he sucker punched you. Ha, ha. Welcome to combat, brother. Doesn’t do much good to stack the race deck, just to build a house of cards, now does it? This is high-stakes poker, for all the marbles. You blinked. You blew.
Many people wonder at the phenomenon that is “Obama.” Who is he? How did he get here? Why do we care?
Hey, how do I know? Life is full of mysteries and great unanswerable questions that have plagued mankind for millennia; there are some things we just have to accept on faith. Deal with it.
There is one aspect of Obamania for which I can provide some insight. In fact, I already have. In my very first post, I explained the irrational “Magic of the “O.”
Now, the reason white people embrace this transcendent, transformational, just-black-enough symbol of the promise of America’s future and triumph over its’ past is simple. White people have a thing about black people with funny names. Especially if that name starts with “O”. Think about it, Oprah, Omarosa, Barack Obama. These names work like gris-gris on unsuspecting Caucasians. As soon as they hear these names they go into a trance-like state, the likes of which have not been seen in America since the Beatles first appeared on Ed Sullivan. These poor innocent descendants of Europeans seem to become hopelessly lobotomized zombie-changelings upon the mere mention of these incantations disguised as names and can’t seem to stop themselves from giving these funny-named black people money. Why else would Omarosa ever have a job?
So, as anyone can plainly see, the political science lab created candidate with the magic voodoo name and the conveniently caramel skin is simply unstoppable. To some, this realization is a comfort, a fulfillment, even a wonder to behold. To the non-delusional, non-believers, however, it’s just freaking creepy.
Now, you may say, “Why just pick on white people, huh? Black people are irrational about him too-oo!” You’re absolutely right, oh Figment of My Imagination, but the reason for black infatuation with electing Barack Obama is simple. We want to rule the world.
Think about it; Oprah, Omarosa, Obama. It’s staaarrrrtinnnng!
Don’t believe me? Next time you watch the news, if you can still stomach it, count how many times they say “Barack Obama.” Listen to how they say it. Barack Obama. Barack Obama. Barack Obama.
Okay, snap out of it, I just wanted to prove my point.
Checkmate! Yeah, I know it’s two different games, but so what? This whole election cycle so far has been completely divorced from reality, so I figure, why not play along?
“Whacha got?”
“I got an inexperienced black guy and a big mouth. You?”
“I got an old guy.”
“C’mon. Ya gotta do better than that! I got hokum in the hole!”
Yes we can! does not inspire me much, unless it’s a Pointer Sisters song, or the title of Sammy Davis Jr.’s autobiography ( Yes I Can ). As Barack Obama’s campaign slogan, my response is usually, “How do you know?” It’s not like he’s ever done it before. He was pretty much a failure as a community organizer, his legal career was undistinguished, at best, his Illinois Senate stint, as well a his University of Chicago law professor job were part-time. He lost his only competitive political race, and was nudged, limping, into the winner’s circle of the nomination by rather dubious means. In other words, what makes anybody think “he can”?
Did I mention he’s black?
I wish that meant something. As a black woman, I wish the historic nature of having a black man running for President of the United States of America had more than symbolic significance as the fulfillment of “The Dream.” I wish we could be absolutely sure it meant that America had finally woken up.
If you’re like me and can’t bear the thought of enduring the sound of Obama’s voice or the spectacle of his preening, never fear, I am here for you. In another weird twist of fate, we are able to exploit MSNBC’s Obamalove to our benefit. They have helpfully provided a full transcript so you can read the speech and get it over with. I’m sure you have toenails to clip or recipes to file or something. Enjoy.
Who, in their right mind wants to be on another mailing list? Obama thinks you should be. In an attempt to beef up voter registration, Camp O is using the Magical Mystical Marketing and Malarkey Masquerade, or his acceptance speech, to reach out and touch the great unwashed. I am not kidding. Yahoo News is reporting that supporters were being asked to participate in a novel Get Out The Vote experiment.
In the hours before he made his entrance, these supporters were being asked to text message the Obama campaign and their friends and to make phone calls from specially tailored call sheets as part of an unprecedented effort to mobilize voters and get nonvoters to register.
WTF?
Obama’s campaign has identified 55 million voting age Americans across the country who are not registered to vote. It has done this by comparing registration lists with lists of potential voters gleaned from consumer databases the same way credit card companies track people’s spending.
Campaign officials estimates more than two-thirds would vote for Obama.
Optimism, or delusion? You decide.
About three hours before Obama was scheduled to speak, his camp sent a text message of its own to anyone who had asked to be notified of his running mate selection last week. “Final night of the conventions tonight — don’t miss Barack’s speech!” the message said. “To get involved locally, REPLY: VOL plus your FIRST NAME and TOWN”
Clever, right?
While the outreach to voters and nonvoters is by itself a useful tactic, the calls will generate useful lists of phone numbers, many of them identified by the specific issue of interest to the person on that end of the call.
I don’t know about you, but I get enough damned unsolicited junk calls, one more might just push me right off the edge. Besides, given Obie’s FISA vote, the last thing I want him to have is easy access. But what a great way to pimp a legacy, huh? MLK would be proud.
Imagine that Martin Luther King had stood in front of the Lincoln Memorial forty-five years ago today, demanding justice for African Americans from their non-representative government, without having accomplished a single Civil Rights victory.
Now, imagine Barack Obama today.
“But, but, but, Obama’s blaaaaaack! ( stomping feet ) You gotta vote for the black guy! Ya don’t want the whole world to think were, like, racist, or something, do ya? Huh? Huh?”
This has been the subtext of the Obama campaign since the earliest days. First, he had to convince black America he was really black; white America always thought he was more than black enough, thank you very much.
Perhaps what the nation has liked most is not what Obama has said or done but what he is. In short, Obama is a black man who does not scare white people. This is mostly not Obama’s fault. He is who he is. He has a life to live, a job to do and a book to promote. He cannot be held responsible for a white paranoia that–outside the music, sports and entertainment industries–demands: If you have to be black, then please don’t be too black.
No, it was black people who needed convincing, thus the “I am too, black!” phase of the contest. Obama himself shared the heartwarming fairy tale of his conception, “Selma Got Me Born” with an audience in South Carolina, and by extension, the world. Michelle Obama told black people to stop with the Jemimah mentality and, “wake up and get it,” Later, Oprah, safely black enough for all America, actually made an appearance for somebody other than herself, breaking a long-standing tradition, to stump for him.
Of course, this script was not written by an anxious Obama, motivated to legitimize himself in the eyes of his brethren, the architect of much of this racial bridge was CNN’s Roland Martin, who insinuated himself into the Obama orbit in much the same way Johnny Cochran took over the Dream Team in the O. J. Simpson case; he volunteered his advice based upon his observation of perceived impending disaster if the racial dynamic wasn’t altered.
Obama had no built-in advantages with the black community, he was foreign to it. Even in Chicago, though he had been involved in voter registration campaigns, community organizing and efforts to mobilize and coordinate black chuch out reach efforts, Bobby Rush had no trouble painting him as an out-of-touch, uppity snob, and ultimately crushed him when Obama had the temerity to challenge the incumbent for his seat in the House.
Mr. Rush told The Chicago Reader, “He went to Harvard and became an educated fool. We’re not impressed with these folks with these Eastern elite degrees.”
He complained that for Rush to continually invoke his Harvard background as though it were a slur sent the wrong message to his young constituents. In a striking Martin Luther King Day op-ed in the Chicago Defender, he drew attention to tension among African Americans of Rush’s own generation, arguing that black disunity was part of what made King’s courage important: “A sizable percentage of the black elite in the pre-Civil Rights south,” Obama noted, “had vested interests in maintaining the racial status quo, and vilified protesters within the community.” (This year, Obama’s longstanding willingness to “call out” the black community has impressed many whites, and made some blacks ambivalent.)
Obama’s subsequent Senate races seem not to have relied on overwhelming black support, it is said he re-drew the map of his district to include more whites, negating the necessity of depending primarily upon blacks.
The idea was to create enough Democratic-leaning districts so that the Party could take control of the state legislature. That goal was fine with Obama; his new district offered promising, untapped constituencies for him as he considered his next political move. “The exposure he would get to some of the folks that were on boards of the museums and C.E.O.s of some of the companies that he would represent would certainly help him in the long run,” Corrigan said.
In the end, Obama’s North Side fund-raising base and his South Side political base were united in one district. He now represented Hyde Park operators like Lois Friedberg-Dobry as well as Gold Coast doyennes like Bettylu Saltzman, and his old South Side street operative Al Kindle as well as his future consultant David Axelrod. In an article in the Hyde Park Herald about how “partisan” and “undemocratic” Illinois redistricting had become, Obama was asked for his views. As usual, he was candid. “There is a conflict of interest built into the process,” he said. “Incumbents drawing their own maps will inevitably try to advantage themselves.”
For many black activists in Obama’s adopted home state, who might be expected to form the core of his political base, a central question still looms about the man who has risen speedily over 11 years from state lawmaker to U.S. senator to a sensation in the 2008 presidential campaign: As he works to appeal to voters across the nation, will Obama stand firm for black people and black causes?
We still don’t know the answer to that question. Obama has, throughout his career, been critical of African Americans. The New York Times relates a story from Obama’s early days as a community organizer, when a planned meeting between the tenants of the Altgeld Gardens Housing Project and the housing authority got a little out of hand.
The crowd of about 700 residents grew irritable in the stifling heat and booed the director when he arrived an hour and 15 minutes late, according to people who were there, as well as newspaper accounts.
The meeting became even more raucous after the director indicated that the agency still did not have a plan to remove the asbestos. The director abruptly left 15 minutes into the meeting after a resident wrestled with him for the microphone. Angry tenants followed him out the door, chanting, “No more rent!”
Later, relating the incident to a friend, Obama criticized the residents.
“Barack basically talked about how tough it was to generate real results through organizing and that it was embarrassing to him to have the residents out of control,” he recounted.
Who was in charge of the meeting? Why was he embarrassed? Because he failed, or the residents didn’t behave the way he wanted them to?
Obama’s views on issues important to black Americans are hard to pin down. In the Chicago Reader article from 1995, he said:
Let’s talk about creating a society, not just individual families, based on these values. Right now we have a society that talks about the irresponsibility of teens getting pregnant, not the irresponsibility of a society that fails to educate them to aspire for more.”
In 2008, he wants to legislate the problem:
Obama said he would co-sponsor a bill, with Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, that his campaign said would address the “national epidemic of absentee fathers.” If passed, the legislation would increase enforcement of child support payments and strengthen services for domestic violence prevention.
“They were spirited, good-humored women [the women he worked
with at Developing Communities], those three, women who—without husbands to help—somehow
managed to raise sons and daughters, juggle an assortment of part-time jobs and small business schemes,
and organize Girl Scout troops, fashion shows, and summer camps for the parade of children that wandered
through the church every day.” [Dreams of My Father, p.167]
It seems clear that Obama’s relationship with the black community is complicated at best; often divisive, in his campaign against Alice Palmer, who recommended that Obama run for her vacant Senate seat when she mounted an ultimately unsuccessful run for Congress, Obama refused to step aside when she lost:
Obama not only refused to step aside, he filed challenges that nullified Palmer’s hastily gathered nominating petitions, forcing her to withdraw.
“I liked Alice Palmer a lot. I thought she was a good public servant,” Obama said. “It was very awkward. That part of it I wish had played out entirely differently.”
His choice divided veteran Chicago political activists.
Right or wrong, the question is open as to whether the greater good was served. Rarely is any large accomplishment touted in Obama’s favor as a result of any of his actions. This is not limited to Obama’s relationship with black Americans, his record is equally thin in the national arena. Other than his criticisms of past politicians and activists and his willingness to shift the onus of responsibility from the government and place it on the overburdened shoulders of the victims, what does he offer? Is the tokenism represented by putting a black face on government indifference enough? Can the ideal of grassroots mobilization co-exist with the reality of corporate sponsorship? To whose benefit?
Barack Obama is both black and white, but when one researches his record, a case can be made that he can just as easily be considered neither. His lack of discernible core beliefs reflect questionable integrity and form a sharp contrast with the man whose legacy he now co-opts for his benefit. Martin Luther King was willing to risk his life, his freedom and his reputation, if proven necessary to advance the goals attendant to his firmly held beliefs. What will Obama risk? For what? The illusion of inclusion is relatively easy to attain, real equality is much more difficult to achieve. Yes, forty-five years ago today, Martin Luther King demanded that America make good the bad check it had issued to its’ black citizens. On this anniversary, Barack Obama will accept the nomination for president from the Democratic Party. Yet, he did not win it outright, his claim to the nomination is tainted and tenuous at best. He has been coddled, protected and assisted over the line like William “Refrigerator” Perry tried to carry Walter Payton across the goal line en route the Super Bowl. Only in the case of Obama, it will count as a victory.
The Democrats have nominated The First Official Affirmative Action African American Token Presidential Candidate.
It seems that Caesar Obama was not born to oratory. Color me surprised. Going back to his days as a lawyer, Obama was not known as a great speaker, according to a July 15, article by Ronald Kessler:
A review of the cases Obama worked on during his brief legal career “shows he played the strong, silent type in court, introducing himself and his client, then stepping aside to let other lawyers do the talking,” the Chicago Sun-Times has reported.
Another July article, this one in the New York Times, about Obama’s early community organizing years, claims that he was more comfortable telling others what to say:
The roles of the residents were scripted and the organizer was a quiet, inconspicuous presence.
AP writer Christopher Wills explores Senator Obama’s evolution from awkward to eloquent. In a 2003 speech in the Illinois Senate about racial profiling, he was said to be less than compelling:
It was the perfect moment for an elegant speech exploring the worries of black Americans and the duties of police officers trying to protect the public. Instead, Obama delivered a two-minute summary filled with jargon like “data collection process” and “management tools.”
He was about as emotional as a tax attorney.
Wills offers further observations regarding Obama’s early efforts:
His comments in the Illinois Legislature were typically brief and matter-of-fact. He was stiff and professorial on the campaign trail.
edit
In his first few years in politics, Obama was sometimes described as talking down to his audiences, coming across as a know-it-all.
edit
News stories described him as sounding like a television newscaster. A campaign speech might be a 10-minute recitation of his legislative record.
Hard to believe this is the same guy who’s about to accept the Democratic Party’s nomination for president with a globally televised speech in a 75,000 seat football stadium filled with dancing girls, balloons, clowns and barking fish, among other spectacular delights. ( Though, to be perfectly honest, his dubious speaking skills are not the only reason I question how he got here. ) The article does provide some clues to Obama’s success.
Kevin Lampe, a Chicago-based public relations consultant who helped with speech logistics at the convention, remembers Obama working hard to learn to read from a TelePrompTer, aiming his comments at both the TV audience and the crowd in the auditorium, and perfecting his delivery. Political speech coach Richard Greene considers Obama’s convention appearance the most successful political speech in American history.
“Obama would not be where he is or even close without that 2004 keynote,” said Greene, author of “Words That Shook the World: 100 Years of Unforgettable Speeches and Events.”
God bless technology, huh? If it wasn’t for TelePrompTers, Barack Obama might still be a geeky guy lurking in the background, telling other people what to say. But then, we, as a people, wouldn’t have “The Greatest Speech Ever Read By A Black Guy Running For President” to look forward to, would we? How else would we celebrate the anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream Speech”? ( Can’t remember what I did last year. ) This gives him a chance to pull out all the stops and really show off all he’s learned over the years. I’m hoping he does something really impressive and identifiably black, like, maybe, Moonwalk on Water. He did say the first black president is required to know how to dance, didn’t he, even though, now that I think about it, Moonwalking is only so black, all things considered. But hey, it would still be cool. Then I’d vote for him.
Did I mention Barack Obama is black? Everybody else did. David Espo, AP:
Barack Obama stepped triumphantly into history Wednesday night, the first black American to win a major party presidential nomination, and thousands of Democrats transformed their convention hall into a joyful, shouting celebration.
When this campaign ends, after future presidents have come and gone, and when today’s young people are grown old, history will remember Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2008, as the day a black man became the presidential nominee of a major party.
In a deafening moment of history, Democrats made Barack Obamathe first black major-party nominee for president, as they rode a delirious outpouring of unity, hope and tears.
Barack Obama was declared the Democratic candidate for president, the first black in American history to win the nomination of a major political party.
Senator Barack Obama, the Hawaiian-born son of a father from Kenya and a mother from Kansas, officially became the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party today, capping a meteoric rise from a little-known state senator to the first African-American to win the nomination of a major party.
Democrats Wednesday officially nominated Obama to be their candidate for president, making him the first African-American to lead a major party ticket.
You know, I’m beginning to think this black thing is a pretty big deal. Especially since most of these stories dealt with Obama winning the nomination and how other people felt about it. Oh, sure, they talked about judgment and leadership and stuff, but nobody said how he had actually shown any of those qualities when he did anything. But, he’s really black. And that’s historic, by gummy.
That got me to thinking; Milli Vanilli was black, and they didn’t do anything either. But they did it very well. Until they got caught. They made history, too.
Every minute that goes by provides more evidence that, yes, the Democrats are jerks Schmoos, with a capital “J.” They keep shooting themselves in the foot stuck in their mouths, not an easy thing to do, to be sure. AP News is reporting:
In an emotional meeting leading up to the Democratic roll call of the states, Hillary Rodham Clinton released her convention delegates Wednesday to vote for certain presidential nomineeBarack Obama.
Many in the crowded ballroom yelled back, “No!”
“I am not telling you what to do,” Clinton responded. “You’ve come here from so many different places having made this journey and feeling in your heart what is right for you to do.”
This was expected, and so far, it doesn’t seem so bad, right? Well, except for that whole “nominate Obama” thing, but enough said about that. While some delegates were said to be “visibly upset” by the plan to engage in a symbolic roll call-in-name-only, some were more upset than others:
Massachusetts delegate Nancy Saboori was visibly upset at the end of Clinton’s speech.
“She doesn’t have the right to release us,” Saboori argued. “We’re not little kids to be told what to do in a half-hour.”
The story continues:
Not all Clinton supporters were on board. Sonja Jaquez Lewis, a Clinton delegate from Colorado, said she and others may walk out if Clinton is denied a roll call.
“If we don’t have an official roll call vote, state-by-state, it is going to reopen a wound,” Lewis said.
Ya think? Unsurprisingly, Claire McCaskill is vying for the title of Chief Among Schmoos:
Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, an Obama supporter, said Clinton’s challenge in getting her delegates to come on board with Obama “may be the biggest test of her leadership.”
“If she’s not a strong enough leader to get her followers to do what’s right for America, then that would surprise me,” McCaskill told the AP. “I think they are going to follow her lead, and her lead was very crystal clear last night.”
Wyoming Senator Mike Massie tells of the shenanigans going on:
Wyoming state Sen. Mike Massie, D-Laramie, said his delegation gave 12 votes to Obama and six to Clinton after state party officials rejected a request from Clinton delegates to delay the vote until after a meeting later in the day with Clinton. Massie said the delegation is still puzzled by orders to vote before Clinton could meet with her delegates and release them.
“That question is on the minds of a lot of people,” Massie said.
They rushed the vote? Say it ain’t so! In other news showing the delusion of the clueless, from another AP article:
Bill Clinton will say in a roughly eight-minute speech that only a Democrat in the White House can “restore America’s standing to what it was eight years ago,” said the aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to pre-empt the former president’s speech.
And this:
In a sign of unity, Obama adviser Berman and Clinton adviser Smith told delegates on Wednesday that they had been working out of the same office all week to ensure a smooth convention.
“The story is that we are working as a team,” Berman said.
Some story. “Clinton adviser Smith.” We know whose side he’s really on. Bill Clinton gets an eight minute speech, Hillary Clinton’s delegates are forced to vote before talking to her, and Claire McCaskill thinks this is all about Hillary. It is, but not the way Claire thinks, if she is indeed capable of such activity. And while Claire might be Chief Schmoo, she can’t hold a candle to Nancy P.:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, presiding officer of the Democratic National Convention, predicted the roll-call voting after the names of both Obama and Clinton were put in nomination would go “very smoothly.”
Anything like Congress, Nan? Schmoos, the whole lot of ‘em.
The Democrats are going out of their way to give Barack Obama the nomination for president. Literally. Let’s quickly review. Neither Barack Obama, nor Hillary Clinton accumulated enough pledged delegates to win the nomination. Super delegates only cast official votes at the convention. They have no obligation to stick with previous endorsements. So, the whole thing is up for grabs, right?
Uh, no.
The first black man to receive a major party nomination will do so by agreement that it is simply time to do such a historic thing. It is the forty-fifth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech, isn’t it? From the AP:
Democratic delegates began marking their presidential nominating ballots Wednesday, making the unprecedented choice between a black man and a white woman. But only a limited number of the ballots were expected to be counted in an afternoon roll call before Barack Obama was declared the party’s presidential nominee by acclamation.
Democrats were poised to formally deliver the party’s presidential nomination to Barack Obama on Wednesday, making him the first black nominee of a major party. While the historic outcome was certain, suspense remained over how a vote of delegates would proceed, and for how long.
edit
Representatives of the Clinton and Obama teams struck a deal setting ground rules for Wednesday’s roll call vote that will hand the nomination to Obama, but will also allow Clinton supporters to express their support for her.
Both stories go on to explain exactly how the show will be choreographed; but make no mistake, a show is all it is. What a shame that these people can make a claim to historical significance based on nothing but stagecraft. But, hey, you go with what you’re good at, right?
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.
What could be more perfect? Well, maybe scantily clad showgirls from Caeser’s Palace twirling flaming batons while the Grambling State Marching Band, playing a funked-up version of “Hail To The Chief, spells out O-B-A-M-A in the end zone followed by a lone, naked marathon runner bringing forth a proclamation that the Republican Party and John McCain have ceded victory to He Who Shall Rule Eight To Ten Years By Decree. After the symbolic chariot race, of course.
Every African American who supports Hillary Clinton has heard this whine a million times. Clueless, these Obots don’t realize how insulting their words are. Of course it’s an insult to me and other black Hillary Clinton supporters; the assumption that choosing a candidate for president using criteria other than a commonality of pigmentation is an infraction worthy of causing me to lose kinship with those whose shared experience, background and blood shapes my identity, is wrong on too many levels to count. It is also an insult to the person making such stereotypical statements. Whether they realize it or not, basing an opinion on racial assumptions is pretty much the definition of the word “stereotype,” and qualifies the person making such comments as a bigot. It’s also an insult to the candidate such people are trying to promote. It says that there are no other grounds for supporting his candidacy. Whatever.
Ann Price Mills, in this video, says what a lot of us feel, and I am grateful to her for having the courage and strength to speak her mind. I am saddened by the fact that to speak as she does requires courage and strength in the first place.
Hillary Clinton did the impossible tonight; she did everything she was asked to do by eveyone who asked her to do it, all in a single speech. The DeaNC wanted her to be a bridge over the troubled waters between her supporters and Barack Obama; her supporters wanted her to show the world why she should be the Democratic Party’s nominee. She did both. Will her supporters do as she asked? Unlikely, but it won’t be because Hillary Clinton didn’t do everything in her power to get them to. It will be because Barack Obama did not. Or could not.
Yet, moments after Senator Clinton accomplished this remarkable feat, the criticism began.
“Barack Obama is my candidate,” she said. “And he must be our president.”
But did she mean it? And would it matter?
The Yahoo News article goes on to revisit Clinton’s campaign criticisms of Obama and highlight the McCain camp’s exploitation of them. It predictably dredges up insults, grudges and slights as well as speculation regarding Bill Clinton’s ability to live up to his “end of the bargain.” Mainly though, it was HRC’s night and the analysis was mostly aimed at her. Saying at the end that Clinton
…left Obama in a stronger position than Kennedy left Jimmy Carter in 1980, when the Massachusetts senator extracted platform concessions and shrank from the traditional unity show at the final gavel.
But she did extract her price.
The bill came due Tuesday. The crowd. The applause. The promise of a vote Wednesday, and a speech laced 17 times by some variation of the pronoun “I.”
At her speech to the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night, Hillary said the right things. Nobody could accuse her of going overboard, but she said the right things.
In response to this quote from Clinton
“To my supporters, my champions — my sisterhood of the traveling pantsuits — from the bottom of my heart: Thank you,” she said. “You never gave in. You never gave up. And together we made history.”
Simon sniped,
It was history. Of a sort. She showed that a woman could win the nomination. But she did not win the nomination. And the guy who did made some history, too.
This schmoo then goes on to further denigrate Clinton’s brave efforts with unnecessary comments like this:
We are now asked to believe that a significant number of Hillary supporters will vote for John McCain in November rather than vote for Barack Obama. That is what some polls show and it has become a major media story line.
To which I say: Hooey. Maybe that is the kind of thing you tell pollsters and reporters, but I don’t think it is the kind of thing that happens in real life.
Obviously, Mr. Simon lacks basic comprehension skills. No one owes Obama their vote, no matter how much they respect and admire Senator Clinton’s efforts on his behalf. And we don’t have to vote for McCain, there are other candidates. Or, we could just stay home. Yet Simon makes it clear that no matter what we do, or what Clinton did, it will ever be considered to be enough. Nor will Senator Obama bear any responsibility for his own prospects. The burden for Obama’s success or failure falls squarely on Clinton’s shoulders.
Tuesday night she said some of the right words. But between now and November, Hillary Clinton can go out and work to heal the wounds or sit back and keep them open.
If this is truly the attitude of Obama and his sycophants, he doesn’t deserve to win. And he can blame people like Roger Simon.
Nancy Pelosi was let out alone again, despite the sincere wishes and best efforts of a large portion of her American constituents. Once again, Nancy Schmancy Pancy found a way to piss people off while talking smack with a foot stuck in her mouth. It wasn’t mine, but, hey, a girl can dream, can’t she?
I wish I could say that it was the gratuitous, thinly veiled PUMA diss that set me off, but that comes pretty late in the Politco article I was reading. No, it was the cluelessness associated with her interpretation of the current poll data:
The speaker said Obama and the other Democratic presidential candidates “have attracted millions of more voters — first-voters voters and many more voters who haven’t voted in a long time.
“Many of them are not even reachable by these pollsters,” Pelosi said. “These are polls of likely voters. Likely voters are people who have voted in the last two elections, and they are likely to vote again. They are not the universe of people who will vote on Nov. 4.”
Why depend on reliable people to vote, huh, when you’ve got limitless numbers of “shadow” people at your disposal? Pollsters can’t find these people, but Pelosi and the Boyz can get their hands on them and, what, make them go vote?
Yup.
“We will own the ground Election Day,” she said.
Tell me, anybody, why are we not supposed to be frightened by this? Or this?
Pelosi said she sees McCain’s initial inability to name the number of houses he owns as “emblematic of the differences between Democrats and Republicans.”
“Democrats have wealth, too — we salute wealth,” she said. “But let me tell you this: This election is about the economy. It always is, and it’s a question of who has the leverage. And for eight years, the wealthiest 1 percent has had the leverage.”
What the flour does that even mean? Who has leverage? Who has wealth? The guy with the most houses? Pat, I’d like to buy a vowel, because there’s obviously a few letters missing. Vanna start touching. Gratuitous PUMA reference next:
The speaker said Democrats are tough on national security but were rightly skeptical of the real threat from Iraq.
“Think of me as a lioness — you threaten my cubs, you have a problem,” she said.
WTF is she talking about? More, in her own words:
She said that with — “God willing” — a President Obama, the country also would speed the withdrawal from Iraq.
Pelosi said: “That’s not a full 100-days agenda. It’s more like 100 hours.”
On the Democrats’ domestic agenda, she said she wants listeners to think of four words: “Science, science, science and science.”
“I think that could take up the 100 days,” she said.
We’ll be out of Iraq in 100 hours but we’ll be spending the first hundred days doing what, baking soda explosions with Bill Nye? There’s a few other lines in this story but, you read it. I have to…decontaminate my computer screen.
We have entered a dimension, a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of…utter foolishness. The Democrats are certifiably batshit insane! What mental deficient giant would actually try to sell a big game of “Let’s Pretend” as a reality show, and then have the sheer audacity ( yeah, I said it ) to get miffed when people balked at playing along? And could there really be a whole so-called “upper echelon” of party leaders conspiring on this? Fluck the flipping dog!
“It seems to be a little more of a problem than I anticipated,” former Democratic Party chairman Don Fowler told The AP. “All you need is 200 people in that crowd to boo and stuff like that and it will be replayed 900 times. And that’s not what you want out of this.”
Well, that confirms what we thought about ol’ Donny. But he’s not the only inmate running this Marx Brothers version of a “rest home,” nuh-uh:
Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen encouraged Clinton to use her speech to give Obama a full-throated endorsement.
“What Obama has to have Hillary do is stand up and say — not only in words but it’s got to be almost method acting — and say it in a way that’s believable that she wants Barack Obama to be president,” Bredesen told The AP. A classy backing “frankly goes toward any future political considerations she may have.”
A script, artistic direction, and a threat in one short paragragh. Wow, way to go Phil! Maybe you and Donnie can sit together on the little bus to the looney bin convention. Even though, when I think about it, you’ll both probably have to stand because there are no seats left. It’s SRO or straight under from here on in:
Even some of Clinton’s most loyal allies — New York Democrats — are increasingly frustrated by the silence from her and her advisers on how to proceed. New York delegates would likely play a key role in the roll call salute to Clinton but they still have no idea what it is they are supposed to do, according to several Democrats who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are supposed to be publicly backing Clinton.
What are you, a bunch of freaking first graders? Is this the first time you’ve ever been out alone? Come the fork on, people, do your damned jobs! Wake up! Hasn’t it sunken into those hatracks of yours that it doesn’t matter what Obama or Clinton say or do? At, last, it’s up to the Obamabots and the Clintonistas. Go for it! Duke it out! Last one standing wins! If you’re on Clinton’s side you’re not going to have a job for long anyway. You might as well take a shot. Party Unity My Ass!
Oh, how the media loves to lie. They frame everything in a way that includes the salient facts, while weaving a tale of their own invention. Take the “Hillary factor,” for instance. Somehow, she must, I tell you, must convince those who voted for her in the primaries to vote for Obama. But what about the people who didn’t vote for her, and also won’t vote for Obama? What about the people who didn’t vote at all? What about the people who left the party because of the way Obama was “selected.” Like me. How are we factored in?
It only stands to reason that the majority of Democratic voters who decided early on that they could not accept an Obama candidacy under any circumstances, would then turn around and vote for Hillary Clinton. After all, for the bulk of the contest, they were the only two Democrats running. So, can those voters fairly be called “Hillary supporters?” No one in their right mind would suggest that all registered voters turned out for the primaries and caucuses. So, how do we know who the stay-at-homes support, if they didn’t vote? Are polls limited to people people who actually voted? Or do poll numbers reflect registered voters? What about currently unregistered, hoped-for voters? How many of them support Hillary? Obama? none of the above? Could that be why they’re unregistered? Again, how many people voted for Hillary Clinton because they just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Barack Obama? Is there a separate category for them in the polling? Barack rejectors?
In a Yahoo News article today about Hillary Clinton’s role at “Obama’s convention,” a CNN poll was quoted:
An opinion poll showed how much work remains for Obama. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll said he and McCain were running even at 47 percent — but only 66 percent of Clinton supporters backed Obama, down from 75 percent at the end of June.
Twenty-seven percent of Clinton supporters said they would support McCain, up from 16 percent in late June.
How many of those voters were always out of the reach of Obama? Twenty-seven percent, maybe?
In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey completed in early June before the New York senator ended her White House bid, 60 percent of Clinton backers polled said they planned on voting for Obama. In the latest poll, that number has dropped to 54 percent.
In early June, 22 percent of Clinton supporters polled said they would not vote at all if Obama were the party’s nominee, now close to a third say they will stay home.
In another sign the wounds of the heated primary race have yet to heal, 43 percent of registered Democrats polled still say they would prefer Clinton to be the party’s presidential nominee.
That number is significantly higher than it was in early June, when 35 percent of Democrats polled said they preferred Clinton to lead the party’s presidential ticket.
Clinton can ask her “supporters” to vote for Obama until she’s blue in the face; won’t matter a whit. In fact, it seems to make things worse for him. First of all, anybody who votes for anybody just because somebody tells them to is a fool. So are people who refuse to face facts. As they head into his Really Big, Historic Coronation Ceremony, the Obamacrats need to wake up and realize that Hillary Clinton is not the problem; a lot of people just don’t seem to want to vote for Barack Obama. Until somebody in the media, the DeaNC, or the Obama campaign starts asking why Democrats would rather vote for the other party’s nominee, or somebody who’s not in the race, would rather not vote at all, or worse yet, defect from the party, the media schmoos will keep looking for the easiest scenario that fits the facts and makes their preferred candidate look good. But they won’t be doing him any favors.
I have had just about enough of Obama supporters, DeaNC shills, Mainstream media pundits, and any and all other assorted apologists for The Chosen One, yelling and screaming from here to there about how Hillary Clinton has to do everything she can to help The Delicate Flower win. Why? Why should she lift one well manicured finger to help him do anything? Isn’t he The Great and Powerful Dragon Slaying Conqueror? Didn’t he defy all odds to defeat the omnipotent Clinton Machine, obliterating the entitlement of the heinous aristocracy Hillary arrogantly believed herself to be rightful heiress to? Or did I miss something?
Day after day, hour after hour, minute aft…oh, hell, you get the idea. But haven’t we all been fed the tediously repititous tripe that Barack Obama is the best thing since Oreos and milk, and in the eyes of the majority of his countrymen and women, nay, citizens of the world, can do no wrong?
Then why can’t he get his own damned votes?
If the Clintons, the Democratic party, and the mainstream media truly believed at the start of the campign that Hillary Clinton was a shoe-in, then she did not, could not be the one who divided the party. Barack Obama did. So, if he broke it, how come nobody expects him to fix it?
What kind of leader runs a campaign whose subtext is, “how can we get her to quit?” Is it a sign of strength to have your paid and unpaid surrogates constantly chide your opponent to get out of the way so you can win without competing, only to step in when your ploy backfires and graciously deign to let her continue?
The Drudge Report called for Clinton to quit after Iowa:
Meanwhile, Democrat hopeful John Edwards has confided to senior staff that he is staying in the race because Hillary “could soon be out.”
“Her money is going to dry up,” Edwards confided, a top source said Monday morning.
History continues to unfold on many levels as the protracted Democratic Party primary race marches on, featuring the first woman and the first African-American with a real shot at winning the White House.
Here’s another first: the press’s unique push to get a competitive White House hopeful to drop out of the race. It’s unprecedented.
“Clinton is being held to a different standard than virtually any other candidate in history,” wrote Steven Stark in the Boston Phoenix. “When Clinton is simply doing what everyone else has always done, she’s constantly attacked as an obsessed and crazed egomaniac, bent on self-aggrandizement at the expense of her party.”
These are but a few examples of the pressure put on Clinton to allow Obama to win. It’s hard to see how this bodes well for a man who wants to negotiate with foreign leaders on his country’s behalf. Will he mount a p.r. campaign to get Iran to give up it’s nuclear program?
Now that he has “wrapped up the nomination” without winning it, he wants to make sure that everybody agrees to pretend he did. And rather than take responsibility for pulling off this farce, he places the burden on the victims of this con. Who would read a fairy tale if the brave knight slew the dragon and then told the dragon to get up and go tell everybody about it? The story the Obamacrats are trying to spin makes just as much sense. And to make matters worse, now they want to blame the dragon for not trying hard enough.
She urged the cheering crowd to support Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, in his bid for the White House, saying she and supporters should “take our energy, our passion and our strength and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama … I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me.”
“Unity is not only a beautiful place as we can see, it’s a wonderful feeling, isn’t it? And I know when we start here in this field in Unity, we’ll end on the steps of the Capitol when Barack Obama takes the oath of office as our next president,” Clinton said just after she and Obama took the stage together.
In her 9-minute speech, Mrs. Clinton used the word unity at least a half dozen times.
“Let there be no mistake about it. We are united. We are united for change. We are, after all, Democrats. So it may take a while, but we’re not the fall-in-line party,” she said.
Just a few days ago, however, it was being reported that Ms. Clinton wasn’t doing enough:
Minutes after pushing through the rope line to thank Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for “all that you do,” Robin Shaffer said she was worried. She feared that the senator she respected and admired for being tough and experienced had not done all that she could to unify Florida’s fractured Democratic Party while campaigning here on Thursday for her former opponent.
Democrats opened their national convention on Monday, seeking peace in the family as they pursue victory in the fall for Barack Obama and his historic quest for the White House.
C’mon, Barack, your campaign manager is a p.r. guy. We all know that he’s “massaged” the press on your behalf, pushing the narrative most favorable to you. Okay, that’s politics today. But don’t you think it’s time you took the bull by the horns and stood up for yourself? You want unity? You want to be a hero? You want to be president? Then be a man. And for once in your life, earn your own damned votes.
In an article in The Amerian Prospect about ( what else? ) Democratic “party unity,” there’s a very interesting little gem in the very first paragraph.
A random sampling of delegates arriving in Denver suggests that the mood is nervously hopeful. There is broad anxiety about why Obama is not doing better, given the favorable external circumstances. However, the selection of Joe Biden as running mate played even better than expected. The running joke is that the white guy is going to give the black guy some soul, as well as some street-toughness that Obama has lacked.
The rest of the piece goes on predictably, Clinton must deliver…blah, blah, blah…delusional bitter supporters…blah, blah, blah…Obama won fair and square…yada, yada, yada…good of the party…just get over it…gag me with a spoon. Okay, the last part’s not in there, and I paraphrased a lot of the rest, but I’ve read so many of these cattle-prods of semi-pseudo-quasi-journalism that my eyes are crossing from being stuck at the top of my head so long.
What’s fascinating, though is the ballsy assertion that Biden is capable of infusing Obama with “soul.” What the hell? Define “soul.” First of all, what is it that a normal person would assume a black guy should have, that Obama obviously doesn’t? If it’s something black that Obama is lacking, why is Obama so popular with black people and Biden isn’t, since Biden’s rumored to have it? Does “street-toughness” equate to black? Or is “street-toughness” “soul?” Is Obama missing both “soul” and “street-toughness?” Do you need these things to be black? President? Frankly, I’m confused. And I’m black. I guess I’ll have to wait for one of Obama’s “interpreters of black expectations” like Roland Martin, or Bob Herbert or Eugene Robinson to explain to me how I’m supposed to feel about this statement. Because left to my own devices, I’m liable to get pissed.
“Things are fine, no really, go on about your business, there’s nothing to see here. Ease on down the road. Go on, now, git!”
That’s what some of the good folks running the DNC are saying to those silly people who want that pesky principle called “democracy” to have some meaning at the Democratic National Convention this year. And they act like there should be no penalty at all, like say, losing a slam dunk election, for doing such a thing.
On Wednesday, Politico reported that Hillary Clinton had created a “whip team:”
In an unusual move, Hillary Clinton’s staff is creating a 40-member “whip team” at the Denver Democratic convention to ensure that her supporters don’t engage in embarrassing anti-Obama demonstrations during the floor vote on her nomination, according to people familiar with the planning.
The team, which is being organized by longtime Clinton staffer Craig Smith, is working in conjunction with Obama’s floor organizers to help foster the image of a unified front during a roll-call process Clinton herself has described as an emotional “catharsis” for her disappointed supporters.
Got it? Hillary and her longtime staffer, okay? Keep that in mind, it’s very important. Because in yesterdays’ New York Times, was this:
The Obama campaign is leaving little to chance. It has created a rapid response team — led by Craig Smith, a former top operative in the Clinton world — to head out to the convention floor at the first sign of any trouble from Clinton supporters.
Lest you think that was a typo, a mix-up, miscommunication or some other sort of mistake, the Times provides this little nugget:
Mr. Obama’s campaign began sending out a one-page sheet of daily talking points to delegates, instructing them what to say and what to avoid in talking to reporters. (In one last week, according to a recipient, the central thrust was how to parry questions about Clinton-Obama strife and Mrs. Clinton’s speech by saying, “I can’t wait to hear Hillary Clinton talk about the future and am excited that her candidacy is unifying our party!”)
I wonder what else Hillary said that Hillary didn’t say, hmmm? And once again, I gotta wonder, what do these people use for brains, and do they use toilet paper after?
How can people entrusted with so much responsibility be so clueless? For anybody to think that you can make a sham nomination of a fraudulent candidate legitimate by forcing people to pretend they’re cool with it, is so amazingly stupid that it’s hard to believe that anyone with mental ability beyond what it takes to scrabble on walls with a crayon could think of it, let alone try to pull it off. But hey, that’s Nancy Pelosi, for you.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is chairwoman of the convention, acknowledged Monday that Democrats are not yet united following the bitter primary fight, especially among women. She said a “gender gap” in Obama’s favor had emerged “even before the convention, and even before the complete reconciliation that we need,” she said.
“But to stay wallowing in all of this is not productive,” she said. “So we can talk about this forever, or we can talk about how we’re going to take our message to the American people, to women all across America, to see the distinctions” between Obama and Republican candidate John McCain.
The biggest difference, Madame Speaker, (it’s a shame when using someone’s title qualifies as a dig, considering Congress’ approval ratings ) is that John McCain won his nomination fairly. Don’t you get it, honey? For a lot of us, that’s huge.
I can’t tell you how relieved I am to read so many articles going to such extraordinary lengths to reassure me, and the rest of the world, that Barack Obama is still black. Who knew? Now, I know that I have, on occasion, told him to cut it out. I mean, how far can you go with the black thing? How much of this “vote for me because I’m black, y’all” or “prove you’re not a racist, vote for my black half,” are we all supposed to endure? Well it seems that a lot of the media don’t agree with me. They seem to think you can never have too much of a good thing.
Barack Obama’s quest for the White House, which began some 18 months ago on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Ill., reaches a historic milestone this week, when he becomes the first African American to accept a major party’s nomination for president.
Eight years into a new millennium and nearly 150 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, the nation is poised to make a historic leap with its first African American at the top of a major political party’s ticket.
It is historic, isn’t it? Doesn’t matter how he got there, right? Even if there are allegations of caucus fraud, lackluster performance during the bulk of the primaries, thug-like tactics by surrogates, or any of that stuff, at least he’s black. The mayor of Trenton, N.J. , Doug Palmer, ( a black man ) is all choked up about it, too. He never thought he’d see a black man nominated for president.
Every American with some basic understanding of our nation’s development must contemplate this week how the 2008 Democratic Party nomination of Sen. Barack Obama as our candidate for president is truly historic.
Obama must really be black, and that must really be historic, huh? Even though, ABC News wants you to know he’s not too black:
The son of a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas, Obama spent formative years in Hawaii and Indonesia, worked his way through college and began his political career as a community organizer in Chicago.
But Bloomberg News reminds us that a little black is historic, too.
He is the first to have such an exotic biography, the son of a white woman from Kansas and a black man from Kenya who grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia and has relatives on four continents.
Of course, being black comes with risks, as the Wall Street Journal points out:
Barack Obama’s rise is driving a sometimes uncomfortable debate in the black community: What does it mean to be black in America?
Sen. Obama embodies contradictions in the community that are starting to bubble to the surface — largely out of the earshot of whites. He is the biracial son of an African father and a white mother in a community where most people are descended from slavery or whose ancestors had direct experience with segregation. He is the married father of two in a community in which more than 60% of children grow up in a single-parent household. He’s a politician who isn’t steeped in the civil-rights struggles of the 1960s and didn’t grow up in the inner city or in a black neighborhood.
Barack Obama is in a situation similar to Jackie Robinson, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) said Monday at a Politico panel on race and the presidential election in Denver. Just as Robinson had to perform well on the field while ignoring racial taunts and refusing to hit back, Obama must do the same, he said.
“No one wants an angry African-American man in the White House,” he said.
Even the British press gets it. The Telegraph thinks Camp O is just making excuses, though:
The Left is preparing its excuse in advance for Barack Obama losing the presidential election. All together now, let’s hear it: It’s All About Race. However few Americans there may be who are actually prepared to utter the words, “I wouldn’t vote for a black man”, the truth, it is said, is that racial bigotry is at the heart of Obama’s failure to take a convincing lead.
This week’s events in Denver are fast turning into a critical moment in Obama’s bid to be America’s first black President. What was once seen as an anointing of his candidacy is becoming a chance to right a campaign facing a series of unexpected crises.
Some black people in this country are conflicted about Obama being black, believe it or not. From the New York Times:
Mr. Harrison, a demographer who is black, says he expects to feel chills when Mr. Obama becomes the first black presidential candidate to lead a major party ticket. But as the Democratic convention gets under way, Mr. Harrison’s anticipation is tempered by uneasiness as he wonders: Will Mr. Obama’s success further the notion that the long struggle for racial equality has finally been won?
Never fear, Barack is here! He knows what the deal is and has plans to handle this biz. From Yahoo News:
Obama, 47, who will become the first black presidential nominee, said Sunday he will try to convince voters he is just a normal middle class American despite his exotic upbringing and Republican claims he is an elitist.
Then Barry’s gonna get his wife to help everybody chill on the black thing. Again, from Yahoo:
“You will have a sense of who she is and what our values are and how we are raising our kids, and I think what you will conclude is `gee, he’s sort of like us,”’ Obama told voters yesterday in Eau Claire, Wisconsin.
Barack Obama’s campaign plans to relaunch his “urban agenda” Monday in what people close to the strategy say is an effort to assure urban leaders and voters of the Democratic nominee’s commitment to cities and minorities without alienating skeptical white voters.
Boy, this being black thing can be hard work, can’t it? But CNN assures us that the black guy remembers that we’re all in this together:
The delegates will make history this week by officially nominating Sen. Barack Obama, the first African-American presidential nominee of a major U.S. political party.
Monday’s kickoff — which features the theme of “One Nation” — has a lineup of heavy hitters guaranteed to sing the praises of Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, while also tearing into McCain.
Before we get too giddy, however, the New York Times reminds us that it always comes down to race:
LIKE so much in his presidential campaign, Barack Obama’s search for a running mate was shadowed by the specter of race.
I feel for Barry O. It’s hard to be black all the time. Compared to that, being president is a piece of cake. And as B. I. Conway says in a TriCities.com article, since both Jesus and Obama are dark liberals, why should we let our prejudices prevail?
So, Virginia, please see that you need not fear Mr. Barack Obama because of his color or his liberalism and progressive thinking. He is less liberal than Jesus. Mr. Obama has already told us that he does not want our guns and will enforce the death penalty.
Edit
I think it not a coincidence that Mr. Barack Obama, a Christian and a man of mixed black and white blood, has risen up to us as he has with such a strong belief that we can come together.
Say what you will about Mr. Conway’s theory of Jesus’ dark skin and liberalism, he’s right about one thing. We do have to come together. I’m just not sure we have to do it as one nation under a Barack Obama groove.
It’s getting hot in herrre, so take off all yo…oh, wrong song. Anyway, it’s getting hot in Denver. We know the police are prepared for any eventuality, but is the fire department? ‘Cause according to Politico, the Obama/Clinton feud might soon be burnin’ down da house.
As Democrats arrived here Sunday for a convention intended to promote party unity, mistrust and resentments continued to boil among top associates of presumptive nominee Barack Obama and his defeated rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
One flashpoint is the assigned speech topic for former president Bill Clinton, who is scheduled to speak Wednesday night, when the convention theme is “Securing America’s Future.” The night’s speakers will argue that Obama would be a more effective commander in chief than his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).
I don’t blame Bill C. for being pissed. Arguing that Obuhbuh will be a more effective commander-in-chief than a guy who actually was in command at one time, is a job better suited to the Impossible Mission Force than a mere former president. Besides, Bill wants to talk about the economy. Go figure.
It’s not just the Clintons who’ve got beef. No sirree, Bob. The Barackians have their panties in a bunch, too.
Some senior Democrats close to Obama, meanwhile, made clear in not-for-attribution comments that they were equally irked at the Clinton operation. Nearly three months after Hillary Clinton conceded defeat in the nomination contest, these Obama partisans complained, her team continues to act like she and Bill Clinton hold leverage.
Imagine the nerve of those Clintons! Acting like a former presidency and an ability to garner 18 million votes entitles them to something!
A prominent Obama backer said some of Clinton’s lieutentants negotiating with the Obama team are “bitter enders” who presume that, rather than the Clintons reconciling themselves to Obama’s victory, it is up to Obama to accommodate them.
And to think some of their surrogates actually agree with them! One of them even said this about Obrother:
“He has not fully reconciled,” said one political operative close to the Clintons, “and he has not demonstrated that he accepts the Clintons and the Clinton wing of the party.”
While the Clintons have a relatively easy job in Denver — to deliver gracious speeches and accept what are likely to be loud cheers from their supporters — it is “Obama who has the heavy lifting” this week, this aide said.
Barack’s Bill Burton thinks it’s much ado about nothing, though.
“This is the sort of story cooked up just to feed cable producers. Not an issue,” Burton said.
But it is an issue to some people in the Clinton orbit — precisely because they know how closely every public word from either Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton will be scrutinized.
Hillary does seem more willing to play along, according to the article’s reporters John F. Harris and Mike Allen:
Hillary Clinton, who associates said seems more at peace with the results of the nomination battle than her husband, is treating her speech preparation as an all-hands-on-deck exercise, bringing back longtime aides who worked with her during the White House years and in her Senate office.
All hands on deck, hmmmmm? Sounds reasonable that she would want her fomer speechwriters, her lawyer, Paul Begala, and former White House Chief of Staff, John Podesta in the bunker with her, to name a few. Podesta seems confident:
He predicted that her supporters will “blow the roof” off the convention center with cheers for her, and that she will in turn make a rousing appeal for Obama.
Podesta, the founder of the liberal Center for American Progress think tank, said Bill Clinton’s challenge is harder. “I think he’s got a high bar because he needs to show enthusiasm, and the press will be looking for any stray remark as a sign that he doesn’t fully support” the Obama campaign, Podesta said, adding, “It’s a bar he’ll get over.”
There’s an ambush a-foot in the media tonight. There is another obviously apparent attempt to further hijack democracy by the wussy Barry and the Obamacrats who’re scared to death that Hillary Clinton will upstage The Chosen at his own coming out party. If they only had a brain, they would be even more terrified that delegates and super delegates at the convention might realize that Obama’s wimp-out agreement to a roll call vote has the potential to expose Obama as the slimy, manipulative fraud he is, just by actually being conducted fairly. Since Obama is all about style over substance, a halfway clued-in Camp O might then try to fight against such a thing happening by launching an all out media blitz pushing “unity,” and putting the onus of achieving it on HRC. Ya think?
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, hoping to unite the Democratic Party and cement her future in it, will gather her hard-won primary delegates Wednesday at a reception where she is expected to formally release them to Barack Obama, CBS News confirms.
Then push it some more:
The high-profile gathering of political regulars who once fought against Obama serves a dual purpose for Clinton: Show fellow Democrats that she can be a team player, and display her still formidable political strengths for the future. Many of her supporters want her to run for president again.
Camp Obiewannabepresident might then find somebody at Salon to hint that if the roll call proceeds fairly, Clinton would be guilty of aiding and abetting the Republicans! That would be so cool, and the Obamaschmoos could probably do it too, since Salon is a San Francisco mag, and you know much those folks love him.
When leading Republicans who are not working on the fall presidential campaign were asked to sketch out the best possible scenario in Denver to boost John McCain, they kept uttering those fateful two words: “the Clintons.” As GOP pollster John McLaughlin put it, “I’m rooting for the media’s tendency to focus on how the Clintons have taken over Obama’s convention.” Republicans saw other potential pitfalls for Obama — from delivering a vaporous acceptance speech to abandoning the safe center on policy issues — but the conversations kept coming back to the woman who nearly won the nomination and the way she will play her hand in Denver.
But what if it worked? What if those media outlets went along and so many other ones did too ( see previous post ) that Clinton did release her delegates? Out of the goodness of her heart. Just so Obuhbuh could be coronated. Wouldn’t that unify the party? Wouldn’t it?
The media schmoos ( a much nicer word than “whores” ) are trying to hypnotize the voting public into believing that unity is possible in the Democratic Party, and that Hillary Clinton can, will and should make it happen. Uh-uh. Ain’t gonna happen. No matter how many shiny objects they dangle in front of our eyes, no matter how many times they repeat their mantra ( “She will release her delegates, she will release her delegates…” ) makes no difference whatsoever. Whether this is a carefully orchestrated campaign being launched by the DeaNC and the Obamacrats, or if the media schmoos are taking it upon themselves to promote this nonsense, it will fall flat. Because it’s not about Hillary. It’s about Barack. We don’t want him to be president. Period. Exclamation point! Get it, Devlin Barrett from AP?
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, hoping to unite the Democratic Party and cement her future in it, will gather her hard-won primary delegates Wednesday at a reception where she is expected to formally release them to Barack Obama.
Clinton’s spokesman, Philippe Reines, said her meeting with her delegates this week will be an opportunity to “thank them for their hard work and support, and most importantly to encourage them to support and work for Senator Obama as strongly as she has in order to elect him in November.”
Here’s the latest: The plan now calls for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) to release her delegates next Wednesday afternoon at 1 p.m. That’s the day after her keynote address before the Democratic National Convention. That means delegates can do what they want during the Thursday roll call. Clinton herself will cast her superdelegate vote for Obama.
Clinton plans to speak to her delegates on Wednesday morning and urge them to support Obama ahead of a roll call vote on the nomination that night, a Democratic Party source said.
Obama aides fanned out to try to tamp down any lingering anger or dissent among Clinton fans that might threaten party unity at the carefully scripted-for-television four-day convention. Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod , stressed that Clinton endorsed the Biden pick, apparently hoping that would sway any disgruntled Clinton supporters.
Hillary Clinton’s disappointed delegates arrived in this Democratic National Convention city Sunday upset that their candidate wasn’t even considered for the presidential ticket, but also insisting that they would fully support presumptive nominee Barack OBama .
Edit
What soothed a lot of delegates was the choice of Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden to be the vice presidential nominee Biden is proving almost universally popular at the convention.
The guys at the Nation are worried about Clinton’s potential for embarrassment,
Clinton could issue a call to arms. And she has an agreement with the Obama campaign to go forward with the nomination and roll-call. But Clinton and her aides are worried. Many of her delegates have formally endorsed Obama, and more than a few plan to vote for him on that first ballot. There is open discussion in the Clinton camp about what the embarrassment level might be?
Isn’t it sweet that so many people care? About the exact same thing, party unity? I’m verklempt. But then, you can’t tell the truth about how Clinton supporters really feel, as Ed Rendell found. Here’s the whole article from Politico about what happened.
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell was supposed to give “closing remarks” during this afternoon’s Shorenstein Center-sponsored panel discussion with all three Sunday show moderators — NBC’s Tom Brokaw, ABC’s George Stephanopoulous and CBS’s Bob Schieffer — but instead, he opened up a can of worms about bias in 2008 election coverage
“Ladies and gentleman, the coverage of Barack Obama was embarrassing,” said Rendell, in the ballroom at Denver’s Brown Palace Hotel. “It was embarrassing.”
Rendell, an ardent Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter during the primaries, now backs Obama in the general election. Brokaw and Rendell began debating campaign coverage, including the on-air comments by Lee Cowan, and when MSNBC came up, Rendell went after the cable network.
“MSNBC was the official network of the Obama campaign,” Rendell said, who called their coverage “absolutely embarrassing.”
Chris Matthews, Rendell said, “loses his impartiality when he talks about the Clintons.”
At that point, PBS’s Judy Woodruff, who was moderating the moderators event, said: “Why don’t we let Governor Rendell sit down.”
That was met with applause from the crowd of big-time media figures, which included Arianna Huffington, Gwen Ifill, Al Hunt, and Chuck Todd.
Woodruff allowed Brokaw to respond, and in defending the network, he said that Matthews and Keith Olbermann are “not the only voices” on MSNBC.
I guess, even though he’s officially backing Obama, Eddie ain’t getting sleeepyyyy, either. Unless of course, they sedated him after. ‘Cause Ol’ Ed obviously didn’t get the memo. The Dems are fine according to Jeanne Cummings, again of Politico:
When Barack Obama accepts his nomination on Thursday, he will sit atop a Democratic Party transformed and strengthened by its time served in political exile. The future — at least until Election Day — looks limitless.
Edit
It’s a richer party, literally and intellectually, after mastering Internet fundraising and establishing progressive think tanks and media watchdog groups to compete with a still formidable conservative brain trust.
So by now I guess I’m supposed to be under so deep that I would believe! truly believe! ‘Fraid not. Just pissed. Enough to try to learn how to hypnotize people myself, even things out.
*Anybody else want to try this, do so at your own risk and get back to me, okay?
The fact that the reality of lowered expectations towards black Americans impacts Barack Obama’s candidacy is something I have written about before in a post called Barack Obama and The Trained Monkey Curve. Simply put, the collective American assumption that black people have limited potential for accomplishment due to our inherent deficiencies accounts for the over-the-top praise of his otherwise average-ness. These media-reinforced perceptions inhabiting the subconscious psyches of a great number of Americans is what lead Joe Biden to suggest that Obama is prepared to lead the nation just because he’s an articulate black guy. Barack Obama’s own insecurities are what lead him to brush the insult off.
Now, the schmoos at Yahoo News are suggesting that lowered expectations somehow equate to humility:
Barack Obama took a sermon on humility to heart Sunday, predicting his presidential acceptance speech might not be the best at this week’s Democratic convention despite his famous oratory skills.
Lowering expectations is one of the oldest tricks in the political book, especially before a pivotal event like a political convention. And expectations for Obama are sky high because he’s delivered such rousing speeches before.
“I’m still tooling around with my speech a little bit,” Obama told reporters on a stop in this Midwestern battleground state. “May not be as good as the other headliners the first three nights, but hopefully it will make clear the choices the American people are going to face in November.”
Could it be that Obama is simply making an honest assessment of his speaking abilities? Where before mediocre performances were unduly praised, perhaps he realizes that he is now more likely to be judged appropriately; as a presidential candidate and not as a black presidential candidate. Humility doesn’t seem to have anything to do with it, otherwise, he wouldn’t be making excuses about a speech to be delivered in a freakin’ football stadium.
Barack Obama is not the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party.
I have said this before, and I’ll keep saying it. Here’s why:
There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party’s designation.
Obama is being allowed to pretend he is the nominee by the Democrats because he’s the one a number of party officials want to nominate. Super delegate votes are being counted in his delegate total, but his push over the top has nothing to back it up.
Nothing in the bylaws requires the so-called “Superdelegates” to declare a candidate preference ahead of the convention, and nothing prohibits them from changing their mind once they declare such a preference.
Clearly, the voters did not select Barack Obama to be the nominee; in fact, according to the voters it’s a virtual tie. Allowing him to prance around the world “looking presidential,” even going so far as to choose a running mate, is simply another act in an elaborate stage production. However, if the nominee status was a car, Obama would be arrested for taking it off the lot without paying for it. It’s not his.
Many sources accuse Hillary Clinton supporters of being angry about the way she’s been treated, and they are correct. But the sexism and disrespect shown her is only a small part of the reason. The fact that she was not seriously considered for VP, though a slap in the face, is not surprising. However, these are small things.
Obama’s not yet the nominee. He shouldn’t be picking a veep at all. It is the treachery of the Obama campaign and its validation by a complicit DNC and MSM that really bites. In executing the Obama version of Howard Dean’s fifty state grassroots strategy, many questionable tactics were employed. Some say the activities rise to the level of fraud.
The way I see it, if Senator Clinton can take the time to send us e-mails telling us what she wants, the least we could do is e-mail her back, telling her what we want. Of course we want to thank her, as I said, she deserves that, and of course we want her to know that we wish her all the best in anything she decides to do from now on. So why not tell her again how much we wish she and her VP pick were taking the nomination instead of Obuhbuh and his running mate, Uncle Joe Biden. And if she did decide to buck the big boys and their still unproven fifty state/bump up the black vote strategy, a whole rainbow coalition of us would back her up.
So c’mon, what do you say? You in? If so, dash off an e-mail to a real “she-ro.” I’m sure she’d love to hear from you.
Barack Obama and his newly selected running mate have already gotten off on the stupid foot. Likening John McCain to George Bush at their kickoff event in Springfield, Illinois today, Biden had this to say:
He repeatedly linked McCain to President George W. Bush and said the Arizona senator would be more of the same in the White House. “The times require more than a good soldier, they require a wise leader,” Biden said.
“John McCain … served our country with extreme courage, and I know he wants to do right by America,” he said of his Senate colleague and the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. “But the harsh truth is loud and clear: You can’t change America when you supported George Bush’s policies 95 percent of the time.”
But just how far from the status quo is Obama’s position toward the nuclear-armed state, which is a known sanctuary for al-Qaeda terror cells? It turns out that Obama, whose platform of change has become the cornerstone of his campaign, may actually be more in line with the Bush administration than either McCain or Hillary Clinton.
“When I announced this policy the other day, Sen. Obama wasted no time in mischaracterizing it. He described my position as — you guessed it — another example of Bush’s third term,” McCain said in Springfield, Mo. “I guess the senator has changed his position since voting for the 2005 Bush energy bill — a grab-bag of corporate handouts that I opposed. Come to think of it, that energy bill was the only time we’ve ever seen Sen. Obama vote in favor of any tax break — and it was a tax break for the oil companies.”
Victor Davis Hanson, a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, a professor emeritus at California University, Fresno, and a nationally syndicated columnist for Tribune Media Services says that the comparisons don’t stop there:
But less noticed is that Obama is not just deflating John McCain’s efforts to hold him to his long liberal record, but also embracing much of the present agenda of an unpopular President Bush on a wide variety of fronts.
Take social issues. Obama is now a gun-rights advocate. Like Bush, he applauded the Supreme Court’s overturning of a Washington, D.C., ordinance banning the possession of handguns.
The senator, also like Bush, supports the death penalty. He recently objected to the court’s rejection of a state law that allowed for the execution of child rapists.
And although Obama is still pro-choice, he now, like the president, thinks “mental distress” should not justify late-term abortion.
In addition, the new Obama would like to continue — and even expand — Bush’s controversial faith-based initiative program of involving churches in government anti-poverty programs.
Today, the Obama/Biden vs. Bush/Cheney comparisons are being made in the New York Times:
The choice by Mr. Obama in some ways mirrors the choice by Mr. Bush of Dick Cheney as his running mate in 2000; at his age, it appears unlikely that Mr. Biden would be in a position to run for president should Mr. Obama win and serve two terms.
Meet the new Dick Cheney. By picking Joe Biden as his running mate, Barack Obama has taken a page out of George Bush’s 2000 campaign and picked a grownup who knows a thing or two about the adult world.
Biden has aspects of the Cheney pick – he’s older, more seasoned and more adept at foreign policy than Obama. But no one imagines that Obama would delegate – and all but abdicate – critical decisions to Biden the way Bush has to Cheney.
However, there are the Cheney-like big business associations of Biden’s to consider, says Politico via Yahoo News:
Also expect to hear more about Biden’s close ties with credit card companies. His largest contributor, based on total contributions by employees, over the past five years has been MBNA, the Delaware-based bank aquired in 2005 by Bank of America that, until then, was the world’s largest independent credit card issuer and a major supporter of the 2005 bankruptcy bill that Biden crossed the aisle to support.
Now for me, the question at this point, isn’t whether the comparisons are valid, it’s about the wisdom of kicking things off by encouraging them to be made. But then, when things are so obvious, what else are you gonna do?
And if Obama’s multinational formative years seem unusual to many voters, Biden is almost a caricature of the American story. Now a white-haired, full-throated senator from Washington central casting, he was born “Joey” Biden to a blue-collar family in Scranton, Pa., and has never seemed to lose touch with his Irish Catholic roots.
That Philly connection is a really big deal according to USA Today:
In choosing the Delaware Democrat, Obama gave the Democratic ticket a blunt-speaking, Irish Catholic who can appeal to the blue-collar voters important to the party’s base. Many of those voters flocked to New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton during the primaries, especially in battleground states such as Indiana and Pennsylvania — where Biden was born and raised in Scranton.
“Better than anybody else,” Biden said, when asked on “Fox News Sunday” to rate his chances of winning Southern states.
“You don’t know my state,” he said. “My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth-largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a Northeast liberal state.”
BIDEN: “I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black. I don’t believe he could have won had he been white. And the reason is, I think it was a cynical ploy by President Bush.”
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” Biden said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
So Biden is not always so eloquent, himself. Even if, on occasion, he’s even been known to put his foot in his mouth, that’s not always a bad thing. Not according to a guy named John Harwood, appearing on MSNBC’s Morning Joe:
JOHN HARWOOD: He is not somebody who is infused with political correctness, the verbal equivalent of putting his pinky up when he opens his mouth. So this is what, the way ordinary voters are as well. They’re not always worried about sort of calibrating every single word by “ooh, is this racially insensitive?” That’s something that Joe Biden brings as an asset to the ticket. The gaffes actually show one of his strengths.
Biden’s embarassing remark about Obama may actually make him a more appealing running mate, however. Obama publicly absolved Biden of any taint of racism at a debate in Iowa last year, and that narrative of racial reconciliation is central to his appeal.
Hey, I don’t have to understand the logic of statements like that for them to work, right? In fact, even if I thought that Obama’s glossing over of a racially insensitive insult made him look wimpy, Biden’s toughness counters his weakness.
Richard Ben Cramer, in his masterful look at the 1988 race, “What It Takes,” wrote that even from boyhood, Biden was not to be underestimated.
“He was little too, but you didn’t want to fight him - or dare him,” he wrote of Biden. “There was nothing he wouldn’t do. Joe moved away from Scranton, Pa. in ‘53, when he was ten years old. But there were still a lot of guys in Scranton today who talk about the feats of Joey Biden. … Joey would never back down.”‘
Maybe that’s why Biden got the nod. He threatened to beat Obama up if he didn’t. Or maybe, when the offer call came in, he was home.
Most noteworthy is what he says about Barack Obama: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
Awwww
As I said in a comment on Sugar’s blog, I’m sure Obuhbuh agrees with Biden’s assessment. In fact, I’m sure Joe’s discerning taste in Negroes is why he got the job.
People are so clueless. There’s a theory floating around that Hillary Clinton not only owes it to her party to deliver her supporters to Barack Obama, there’s a belief that such a thing can be done. ‘Fraid not. When will people get it through their heads that people chose to vote for Clinton, they did not pledge allegiance to her? Voters looked at the candidates running and made a decision, as they always do. However, none of those voters agreed at any point to follow HRC blindly.
A large number of those who voted for Hillary Clinton in the primaries also flat out rejected her opponent, some did not. Some people, like me, believe Clinton is the far superior candidate, while Obama is woefully unqualified. For others, it was about one candidate being good, the other being better. Still others, while not being fully committed to HRC, came to the decision to support her as a result of deciding that Obama was unacceptable under any circumstances, no matter who opposed him. Whatever their reasons, a sizable number of people who voted for Hillary will never vote for Barack Obama, no matter what Hillary Clinton says.
It is extremely simplistic, and frankly, stupid, to assume that if Clinton is unavailable, Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents will gravitate to Obama by default. It is much more logical to assume that removing her from the equation gives the victor the opportunity to make his case to the half of his party that didn’t vote for him in the primaries. Yet, everyone wants to obscure the fact that he is fundamentally incapable of doing any such thing by trying to put the burden of convincing these voters to embrace the “presumptive nominee” on the shoulders of the candidate those voters still prefer. This defies common sense.
The startling news in the bipartisan Battleground poll unveiled midweek by Lake and her Republican counterpart, Brian Nienaber, is McCain’s 10 point lead among independents. The election outcome in November will likely hinge on that group, and they were supposed to be Obama’s strong suit. “McCain is a known quantity; Obama is a new quantity,” Lake explained, adding that independents right now are deciding on the basis of strength of leadership, rather than change.
No, Ms. Lake, Independents are deciding on the basis Obama being who he is, and coming up short. Clift speculates that John McCain is leading in part because of his clever ads depicting Obama as…well, Obama.
McCain is a far more plausible candidate at summer’s end in part because he has sanctioned a sharply negative campaign against Obama.
Spit it out, man. You’re getting the hell on everybody’s nerves. C’mon, Barack, if you really know who you want your VP to be, and they agree to do it ( which, from what I understand, is no sure thing ) wouldja just tell somebody and get it over with? Good golly, Miss Molly, you’re really starting to piss me off.
Now the fact that you’re working my nerves should come as no surprise. I don’t like you. But you’re starting to annoy people who would drink your bathwater as an aperitif. Even your buddies in the MSM are getting antsy. The Yahoo News/Politico schmoos think you’re dragging this out way too long. And they used to love you.
Delay brings two potential risks for Obama.
As it now stands, his announcement will land on a weekend and bleed right into the nominating convention—a time when a nominee can already expect to be dominating national attention.
What’s more, by keeping expectations hanging for so long, Obama makes it harder to deliver on all the anticipation. A weeks-long strip tease, ending with a naked Joe Biden or Evan Bayh—or some other safe but unsexy choice—might prove deflating.
Might? Prove deflating? How can you de-flate a limp di candidacy further?
“The only explanation that makes sense is that he really does have a surprise pick or he’s trying to convince someone to join the ticket,” said a skeptical operative who has worked for Hillary Clinton, who believed that Obama has squandered a good opportunity to set the agenda in the week before the convention.
Now, I agree with S. O. ( Skeptical Operative ) that you’re having a hard time getting somebody to go down on with you. You’re blowing this thing so completely all by yourself you don’t need any help. And make no mistake about it, you’re not picking a running mate, you’re picking an anchor. Whoever you chose is going to sink you even faster.
Politico’s schmoos did try to find support for your interminable delay:
Tad Devine, John Kerry’s chief strategist in 2004, agreed that delay makes sense in the current environment. “When you have an announcement it’s immediately positive, typically,” Devine said. “Things move so quickly that the inevitable negative front would have come in 48 hours. [In this case] the convention occurring within 48 hours will cut off the inevitable scrutiny of the vice presidential pick.”
That guy did work for Kerry, though, so I wouldn’t put much stock in his opinion. Though, Lord knows, cutting the scrutiny time down is always a good thing for you. But Bob Shrum seems downright pissy about the whole thing:
“If it’s Biden,” said veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum, “it’s sort of like a long movie about the Civil War. We know who won. If they did it Friday evening at 5:30 they would dominate the evening news, Olympics or no Olympics. If they do it tomorrow, it will dominate tomorrow and Sunday and we’ll move on as we go into the convention….But it doesn’t matter a whit to the outcome of the election. I think we are consumed by this. Here we are sitting here talking about it.”
I agree with Bob, Barry. I’m sick of people talking about it, too. And talking about it, and talking about it, and so on, and so on, and so on, and…oh, say something, willya, so they can shut the hell up! That’s what it means to be HSIC ( Head Schmoo In Charge ). Sooner or later, you gotta uh…umm…ya know…uhhh… spit it the hell out, man!
First of all, a reasonable ( or, unreasonable ) person might well ask, “What the hell is a “schmoo?” The short answer is, that it’s my made-up name for Obamabots. But that doesn’t tell the whole story. When I was a kid, long, long ago, in a land far, far away ( Chicago ) I remember seeing ads for a Milton-Bradley board game called “Schmo.” Though I never played, nor owned, the game, I loved the ad’s tagline, “Don’t be a schmo.” This game did not last long, in fact I could not find a single reference to it online. But, I know it was real, dammit! Wasn’t it?
Anyway, I later learned that “schmo” is a Yiddish word. According to the Free Online Dictionary:
schmo or schmoe also shmo(shm)
n.pl.schmoes also shmoesSlang
A stupid or obnoxious person.
[From Yiddish shmok, penis, fool; see schmuck.]
So, a “schmo” is a “schmuck.” The thesaurus on Answers.com defines “schmuck” this way:
Now, having met many people as an adult who shared with me parts of their wonderful cultures, I learned these words, as well as others, like “schmeggey,”
(Yiddish) /shmeggy/ also shmegegge
1) a contemptible person; an idiot 2) baloney; hot air; nonsense
and incorporated them, and various others, into my own, personal, Ebonic-infused lexicon. In other words, a “schmo” = “schmuck” = “schmeggey” = “Obot” ( only moreso, thus the additional “o” ) = “schmoo.”
Politico has always epitomized “schmoo-ness,” and puts it on full display in their “story”(?) “Hillary Gets Stiffed.” Whatever images that title brings to your mind, Politico explains HRC’s “stiffing” like this:
Obama has often said, most recently on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on July 27, that Clinton “would be on anybody’s short list.”
But apparently not his.
“She was never vetted,” a Democratic official reported. “She was not asked for a single piece of paper. She and Senator Obama have never had a single conversation about it. How would he know if she’d take it?”
She was “never vetted“? Whaddaya mean, she was “never vetted“? If Hillary Rodham Clinton has never beenvetted, the word has no meaning.
Politico’s writer, Mike Allen, and contributor, Alexander Burns, do seem to walk it back a bit:
An Obama aide said “absolutely exhaustive research was done on her over the course of the 16 month primary. She was researched more closely than any candidate in history.”
So, while the “unnamed aide” gets 1/2 a Florida/Michigan point for displaying some common sense, Politico still qualifies as full-fledged, rabid schmoos. They reported it, didn’t they?
Clinton “not vetted.” Honey, please. Now, he might not pick her, but it won’t be because she ain’t “been vetted.” It will be because God is merciful and real. Who the hell wants to be his flipping VP, anyway? If anybody worth their salt wanted the flipping job, he wouldn’t be doing this silly phone fake-out thing. I wish y’all could see my neck twirling my head around, with my eyes closed, in my best inner-city home-girl tradition. Hummph.
Buncha freakin’ schmoos.
PUMA
Just Say No Deal
*Footnote: While many in the PUMAsphere are outraged that the Obama camp never seriously considered Clinton, which seems to be the point of the referenced article, my point was that the excuse was so weak it qualifies as a further insult in itself. Like the geeky dork who grew up next door to you, it wouldn’t bother you at all if he took somebody else to the prom. Sure, it would have been nice to be asked, but it would be a slap in the face if he told you the reason he didn’t do so is because he didn’t know where you live.
Hillary Clinton just can’t win with some people. If she runs for president, she doesn’t run right. If she stops running for president, she doesn’t do it soon enough. Now, her endorsement of her “rival” ( I put it in quotes because I don’t want anyone to think they’re equals, ironically, he pales in comparison ) is “too tepid” for the New York Times:
Minutes after pushing through the rope line to thank Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for “all that you do,” Robin Shaffer said she was worried. She feared that the senator she respected and admired for being tough and experienced had not done all that she could to unify Florida’s fractured Democratic Party while campaigning here on Thursday for her former opponent.
What more do you want, Ms. Shaffer, cartwheels?
Many who had supported Mrs. Clinton’s run for president shared Ms. Shaffer’s opinion. Democrats who said they had recently accepted that Mr. Obama, of Illinois, would be the Democratic presidential nominee greeted Mrs. Clinton’s 30-minute speech — her first rally in Florida on his behalf — with warmth but also demands for more.
Many? How many? Who? Hello? So what, exactly did Clinton do that could be judged as “lacking”?
In her speech, Mrs. Clinton, of New York, offered an unequivocal endorsement. She repeatedly linked her signature issues of health care, the economy and abortion to Mr. Obama. Emphasizing how a President Obama could further her agenda in the Senate, she said, “I need a president who will work with me, who will be there for the people I care about, that I get up and fight for every single day.”
Well, I guess she could have been more unequivocal. I mean, there’s unequivocal, and then there’s unequivocal, know what I mean?
Guy Montes, 63, a retired shift manager for United Airlines and a Clinton supporter in the primary, said later that Mrs. Clinton’s heart did not seem to be in it.
“It was a platonic type of endorsement,” Mr. Montes said. “It wasn’t real love. She’s just doing what she’s supposed to be doing.”
Okay, I get it. She’s supposed to suck his…up to him. With love.
Even Cecilia Payne, 52, an insurance agent in West Palm Beach originally from Barbados, who declared that “the Clintons are the best thing that ever happened to politics,” said Mrs. Clinton must work harder.
“She should have been a little more forceful and more convincing,” Ms. Payne said.
Forceful and convincing. “Vote for Obama dammit! Because I said so, ya frickin’ schmoo!” That work for you, Ms. Payne? Gee whiz, do they want her to beg? Bribe? Submit to a Frankensteinian personality exchange?
Many here said they feared that Mrs. Clinton did not fully appreciate the divide that remained among Democratic voters. Ms. Shaffer, a part-time medical technician, said many older voters she knew were still struggling with racial prejudice, an issue Mrs. Clinton did not substantially address.
Oh, now I get it. It’s Clinton’s fault he’s black. And, it’s her fault that some old people have a problem with that. I guess it’s reasonable to expect her to wave her magic wand over the racially insensitive masses and relieve them from the burdens of their own prejudice. And while she’s at it, she could point it at Barack and make him white! That would solve everything! At least in this alternate universe where “unequivocal” means “tepid,” it would.
Well, Real Clear Politics thinks it is. In a story on their website, they refer to a study from the Center for Media and Public Affairs ( a joke in itself; the study, not the Center, but that’s debatable ) which finds that the “presumptuous nominee” of the DeaNC is not a barrel of laughs. Who knew? In a press release, ( seriously ) the Center touts it’s findings:
Barack Obama still lags far behind Hillary Clinton and John McCain as the most joked-about presidential candidate in opening monologues by hosts on the late-night TV talk shows, according to a new study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs. However, the study finds that Obama attracted the most jokes on Comedy Central’s “fake news” shows. (The study period does not include recent revelations about Senator John Edwards’ sexual indiscretions.)
They didn’t do Edwards!? What kind of quack study is this? Who are these people, anyway? Well, whoever they are, they broke down the number of jokes per comedy show, per candidate. Don’t these people have real work to do? They even list some of the “jokes” themselves ( I’m not kidding ) most of which are duds. The funniest lines mentioned are Leno’s:
McCain:
The only way McCain could get less coverage is if he got a primetime show on NBC. – Leno
Obama:
Obama said he’ll visit Iraq and Afghanistan because he wants to see an area overrun by violent extremists. So it sounds like he already misses his old church. — Leno
Clinton:
Only in America could a woman who’s married to a man from Hope go to a town called Unity and fake something called Sincerity. – Leno
Those were the highlights, did you hear the rim shots? I’ll give you a minute to collect yourselves before I continue…
…okay, ready?
Now, I beg to differ with these scholars of comedic intellectosity, but, Barry O is a hoot. He does impressions:
He sings:
You did catch the smooth dance moves, di’ntcha? He’s always been good for a laugh, I tell ya.
Those guys at that phony baloney Center need to buy a clue, huh? I could go on, but…you get the idea.
There’s a universally accepted truism in the black community that African Americans have to “be twice as good to get half as much.” This perception is evidenced by the obvious fact that some non-black people receive perks and benefits that black people with similar qualifications do not. African Americans are not alone in this perception of the treatment they receive, women and other minorities have expressed similar complaints about their positions in American society.
A paper by Abigail A. Sewell in the Journal of Undergraduate Research, March, 2005, seems to highlight this phenomenon:
Being overworked and undervalued occurs in high-status occupations as well as low-status occupations. While Black Americans have touted education as the key to gaining equality, today many educated Blacks find themselves in jobs where they must meet expectations far above those of their co-workers to prove their competence.
Yet every coin has a flip side. In the case of the “twice as good/half as much” coin, the reverse is the “curse of lowered expectations.” This is a documented reality, black school children and workers at every economic level feel that they have been victimized by the fact that people in authority often view them as being limited in their ability. The Daily Pennsylvanian shares this from a freshman panel discussion on multiculturism:
Another theme in the discussion was the often presumed lowered standards of minority students. Many students said the stereotypes of minorities as beneficiaries of affirmative action quotas and sports recruiter’s influence are ever-present on campus.
Edit
“People assume you must play a sport and that you don’t belong here,” Mobray added. “I believe teachers very often share this low expectation of blacks, but how can you expect people to excel if you don’t expect the high standards that you expect from others?”
Dr. Jawanza Kunjufu says this is especially true of young black males:
The unfortunate reality is that many teachers lower expectations based on race, income, gender, appearance, parental involvement and education. Therefore, if a child is African American, low-income, male, poorly dressed, and parents are not involved and do not possess a college degree, there is a strong probability that the teacher will lower expectations.
We’re all aware of the effects of lowering expectations in children. This is the reason we do not call our children “stupid,” for fear they will become what we expect them to be. Interestingly, if we do have relatively low expectations of children, we tend to be overly excited about those who perform above our prejudice. Therefore, an average child might develop an inflated self-image due to being overly praised for less than praiseworthy accomplishment, while those truly gifted could almost be considered freaks.
Senator Clinton, back in June, we, the members of the fledgling PUMA movement, thanked you for all you’d done to that point and told you we’d take it from there. We did. Everyone, in every aspect of the PUMA/Just Say No Deal coalition ( and all the other individuals and organizations opposed to the hijacking of your candidacy by the rabid Clones of Dr. Deanenstein who masquerade as what passes for the Democratic party leadership nowadays ) have done, and will continue to do, everything we can to assure that you get a fair shot at the nomination. We think that’s what you want and we don’t think it’s too much to ask. And while we’ve moved the ball farther down the field than we even imagined, it’s time to, in a mixed-metaphorical kind of way, hand the baton back to our anchor leg and team leader.
PUMAs will be in Denver, Senator. There may not be millions of us, we don’t have the seemingly unlimited funds your opponent is able to generate, so there might not be rock concert sized screaming hordes, but there will be a sizable presence of loyal Hillocrats, you can bet your boots on that. And since they won’t have unlimited funds to throw around, itchy palms will have to go ungreased, meaning their ability to influence what is being portrayed as inevitable will likely be negligible. What they will have in abundance is passion. And faith. And a willingness to give it all to you, to use as you see fit.
But, you gotta wanna. You’ve got to fight. You owe these delusional power-grubbers currently in charge of the party nothing. Working under the convoluted theory that because they gained a majority in the last election, they must know what they’re doing, these chuckleheaded schmoos promptly turned around and negated their own success. Not only that, they’re so clueless that it never even dawned on them that the victories of 2006 might just owe more to the mood of the electorate than the prowess of the political “masterminds.” The bottom line is, it’s not going to work again; because of them. Americans are not going to elect another empty promise carrier after having put a whole slew of them in office to no good effect.
This nation wants a president who can deliver. Polls show that a lot of people, myself included, believe that person is you. That’s remarkable given that you’re not only officially not running, you’ve spent the last two months telling everybody to vote for the other guy. Yet, we still say NO. Emphatically. We want you.
Take the shot, Senator. You’ve really got nothing to lose, we do. These nominally in charge morons are going to continue to try to marginalize and diminish you. You scare them. But if this farce is allowed to continue unchecked, we all lose; democracy loses. It would become even more apparent that influence matters more than votes, that corporate entities matter more than people, that political manipulators matter more than voters. We refuse to allow that to be true. But we need you to fight. We need you to go for it. It’s a lot to ask, I know, but sometimes you’ve got to risk it all to win it all. There’s a lot at stake, but there are a whole lot of us who believe you can do it. And no matter what, whether we can make it to Denver in person or not, we’ve got your back. So please, will you take it from here?
Hillary Clinton is winning the presidential race, and she’s not even running! Handcuffed by the DNC and the MSM during the primaries, she still won the popular vote. With both hands tied by her own party she still beat their coddled and cuddled “selectee.” And now, she’s kicking everybody’s butt from the comfort of her living room.
Buried deeply within yet another story about yet another poll showing Obuhbuh tanking, is this little gem:
It’s also worth noting that while Obama leads McCain by three points in the poll, Clinton edges the Republican by six points in a hypothetical match up, 49 to 43 percent. But she remains a polarizing figure: 49 percent say they don’t want to see her as president someday, and 42 percent view her favorably versus 41 percent who see her in a negative light.
So what if she’s polarizing? She’s winning! From a freaking Barcalounger! These two yoohoos have been running like the Dickens against each other for months and neither one of them can beat the chick that’s been chilling with her old man and kid ( when she wasn’t being exploited by the schmoo running in her rightful place. )
Not only that, despite Senator Clinton’s best efforts ( and I mean that sincerely ) Obonehead can’t even convince her supporters, his own flipping party members, that he deserved to win. Because he didn’t.
…Yet perhaps the biggest factor keeping the presidential race close has been Obama’s inability to close the deal with some of Hillary Clinton’s supporters. According to the poll, 52 percent of them say they will vote for Obama, but 21 percent are backing McCain, with an additional 27 percent who are undecided or want to vote for someone else.
What’s more, those who backed Clinton in the primaries — but aren’t supporting Obama right now — tend to view McCain in a better light than Obama and have more confidence in McCain’s ability to be commander-in-chief.
As I have written before, Obama didn’t even win the nomination. Technically, the DNC does not really have a presumptive nominee. And considering all the other info in this MSNBC story, they need to stop pretending that they do.
Overall, Obama holds a three-point lead over McCain, 45-42 percent, which is within the survey’s margin of error. That’s down from Obama’s six-point advantage last month, 47-41 percent.
For some stupid reason, people like Peter D. Hart, the Democratic pollster who, with Republican Neil Newhouse, conducted this poll, keep putting all the onus on Hillary.
For these reasons, Hart believes that Clinton’s speech on the Tuesday night of the Democratic convention will be a significant event. “The Democratic convention is more than a coronation,” he says. “It is an event where the words of Hillary Clinton are probably going to be exceptionally important.”
Hey Clueless, this is NOT Clinton’s mess to fix! The DeanNC picked, pushed and tried to shove his lousy candidate down everybody else’s throat, and if the lousy candidate can’t close the freaking deal, too forking bad! There is one thing the Keystone Kops running things can do to make things right, put it to a vote. Let the convention proceed by the rules and spirit for which it was intended. My girl will beat your guy with both hands tied behind her back. And spot him a 2 month head start. C’mon, I dare you. Ya buncha schmoos.
Barack Obama, like his political twin, George Bush, is all hat and no cattle. In another sign that the candidate values style over substance and image over reality, he seems to have coerced Hillary Clinton into trying to keep her supporters in line at the convention. According to Politico:
In an unusual move, Hillary Clinton’s staff is creating a 40-member “whip team” at the Denver Democratic convention to ensure that her supporters don’t engage in embarrassing anti-Obama demonstrations during the floor vote on her nomination, according to people familiar with the planning.
The team, which is being organized by longtime Clinton staffer Craig Smith, is working in conjunction with Obama’s floor organizers to help foster the image of a unified front during a roll-call process Clinton herself has described as an emotional “catharsis” for her disappointed supporters.
Can’t have people involved with pulling off a sham election of a non-nominated candidate looking like they’re trying to pull off a sham election of a non-nominated candidate, now, can we?
“If people get down there on the floor and want to start blowing kazoos and making a scene we want to make sure we’ve got people who stand in front of them with Obama signs,” said a person involved in the planning.
Now, why would I think this was being orchestrated by Obama, you ask?
Although some former Clinton staffers balked at policing their own supporters, its ranks were filled by people itching for a floor pass — not an easy get for Clinton’s troops at the Obama-run convention.
In a video shown on You Tube and blogs everywhere last week, Pastor James Manning stated that Hillary Clinton had been chosen as running mate to Barack Obama. That has not yet come to pass, and hopefully, it won’t. However, another of Rev. Manning’s predictions has indeed come true. “That brother is sinking like a lead rock in a glass of KoolAid,” has proven to be profoundly accurate.
Real Clear Politics has Obama leading 44.9% to John McCain’s 43.6% in their national average. Rasmussen shows Obama with a 3 point edge, 45%-42%, but only a one point advantage when “leaners” are included, 47%-46%. CNN reports:
According to CNN’s average of several recent national surveys, Obama’s lead is now a slim 3 points over the Arizona senator, 46 percent to 43 percent, half of his advantage in a CNN poll of polls one week ago and down from a high of 8 points in mid-July.
A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll out Tuesday evening was the latest national survey to indicate that Obama’s lead is dwindling, putting the Illinois senator ahead of McCain by only 2 points, well within the poll’s margin of error. The CNN poll of polls also includes new surveys from Quinnipiac and Gallup.
Of course, CNN blames Hillary, but, what else is new?
“The McCain team has been very open that they went to school on the Hillary Clinton campaign, that they learned from that,” said CNN contributor David Gergen, a former counselor to three presidents.
“And, on this 3 a.m. ad, what’s very striking, as some have pointed out over the last few days, is that Barack Obama was winning a steady streak of victories against Hillary Clinton,” Gergen said. “And then she ran that ad, and she really went on the attack on the experience question. And she won the bulk of the primaries thereafter in the closing months of the Democratic primaries and won 500,000 more votes than he did and almost took it away from him.”
And McCain not only enjoys a five-point edge in a two-way race against Obama, but also in a four-way contest including liberal independent candidate Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr, the poll reveals. In the four-way contest, McCain wins 44% support, Obama 39%, Barr 3% and Nader 2%.
This latest Reuters/Zogby poll is a dramatic reversal from the identical survey taken last month – in the July 9-13 Reuters/Zogby survey, Obama led McCain, 47% to 40%. In the four-way race last month, Obama held a 10-point lead over McCain.
While CNN shows why the first part of Rev. Manning’s prediction is unlikely to come true, Obama does seem to be “sinking like a lead rock in a glass of KoolAid.” So in honor of the good Reverend’s prescience, let’s have some church up in here!
Blogger extraordinaire, Sugar, of Sugar ‘N Spice, has long ago made the spot-on comparison between the cult of Obamanaia and a power/money-hungry, Reverend Ike-like character portrayed by Richard Pryor, Rev. James L. White. Pryor introduced the flamboyant Rev. White character on his May, 1977 NBC special, but he was actually born in the movie Car Wash, released the previous year, as Daddy Rich .
When I began reading Sugar’s blog, she would often come under attack from crazed, mostly black, Obamabots, incensed because she dared question the Chosen One. How dare she refuse to pledge solidarity with her brethren and not march in lockstep with them, just because he’s an obvious fraud? Interestingly, a similar scenario is played out in this clip from Car Wash. Pryor’s Daddy Rich basks in the glow of fawning admiration from the black masses until the lone voice of a character played by Bill Duke threatens to shatter the carefully crafted illusion. Like Sugar, Duke’s character is shouted down by his peers, but like Sugar, Duke’s character is right.
Barack Obama is one tough guy, buddy. Don’t you dare forget it, either. I know, because he said so. Even though he seemed kinda wimpy when he and McCain appeared together at the Saddleback conference in California, to be fair, the questions at the Faith Forum wereabove his pay grade. But with the benefit of distance, he set Mr. McCain straight. At a rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, Obama drew down.
“Our job in this election is not just ‘win,’ although I’m a big believer in winning,” Obama said during the rally. “I don’t intend to lose this election. John McCain doesn’t know what he’s up against.”
“He can talk all he wants about Britney (Spears) and Paris (Hilton), but I don’t have time for that mess,” Obama said.
You hear that, Johnny Mac? He “don’t have time for that mess.”
Obadass took on McCain at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Orlando, Florida earlier in the day, too.
“Let me be clear: I will let no one question my love of this country,” Obama said to applause.
McCain, of course, wasn’t there at the time, having spoken to the group the day before. But I bet he was scared when he heard about it. And he’d just better watch himself, too, if he knows what’s good for him. You do not mess with Barack Obama, Mackie. He bad.
Well, it seems as though the presumptuous nominee of the Democratic party wants to open next week’s convention to the “little people.” Yahoo News is reporting that people Camp “O” calls “real” will have prime-time speaking roles. Isn’t that special?
An Indiana railroader, an Iowa mother and a Michigan truck driver are getting a moment at the Democratic convention to help portray Barack Obama as the people’s champion and counter GOP characterizations of him as an out-of-touch celebrity.
Now why would the GOP have to resort to mis-characterizations when they could simply point out the fact that Obuhbuh is so inadequate among real politicians that they have to surround him with civilians in order to try and make him look good?
The idea is for these “real people,” as the campaign calls them, to share personal stories about why they are supporting the Democratic presidential candidate and how they think he will help folks like them and the more than 20 million expected to be watching the convention at home.
Here’s a novel idea, Obie. Why not take this golden opportunity to tell all those voters watching what you plan to do for them, so they don’t have to guess?
Obama has an extra challenge since he is expected to become the first black nominee of a major party, the subject of racism and smear campaigns questioning his background and patriotism. A goal of the convention is to describe his American story, his family roots and his understanding of real-people challenges.
Nah, why actually be presidential when you’ve got a whole deck of race cards up your sleeve, huh? And what could possibly be more moving than real words spoken by real people?
Professional speechwriters are helping prepare their remarks, timed to about three minutes each. And just like any senator or other VIP speaker, an assigned staff member will oversee their schedules and logistical movements, including media interviews, speech coaching and on-stage rehearsals.
Oh, well, it was just a thought. The Democrats are a party of schmoos. I’d rather hang out with the real “little people” from the Wizard of Oz. Maybe then I could borrow a hot air balloon and go over the rainbow. Anything to get the hell away from the Obamacrats. Sheeesh. Munchkins rule. Dems suck.
Barack Obama has sold Howard Dean and the Democratic National Committee the theory that, combined with Dean’s “50 State Strategy“ increased voter participation by African Americans will not only deliver the White House, but will result in significant gains for downticket Dems nationwide. The theory goes that if the large number of currently unregistered, eligible black voters were to be registered, then be lured to the polls to vote for Obama, he’s a shoe-in. The Wilmington Journal reported in their August 7-14 issue,
There are 56 million unregistered voters nationwide, 32 percent of the total eligible voter ranks, the Obama campaign says. Of that number, eight million are black (which is also 32 percent of eligible African-American voters).
“There are a million people who are eligible to vote who aren’t registered in North Carolina,” Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee told The Wilmington Journal during his recent stop in Raleigh two weeks ago. “We believe that the vast majority of those voters would vote for Barack Obama if they had the opportunity, and we’ve got to reach every single one of them.
Now, how to find and register these voters requires an ingenious approach. When courting African American voters early in the primary campaign, Hillary Clinton relied on the black church.
Clinton can be seen frequently at Sunday morning worship services in black churches not only in South Carolina, but nationwide.
“If you’ve ever been to a worship service and seen Sen. Clinton there, especially in the African-American churches, outside the fact that she’s a white woman among African-American congregants, you would think that she fits right in. It’s just very natural.”
Perhaps it was Clinton’s ease with black Americans or the perceived automatic advantage from her association with her husband’s legacy that spurred the Obama campaign to think outside the church box. To be sure, Obama has been involved with religious outreach going back to his community organizing days, however there was obviously a need to mine a field he could claim exclusively. Especially since, prior to the South Carolina primary, monolithic black community support of the Illinois Senator was hardly assured.
“I think the world is too large, too huge and the problems too great for someone to come in on the job training. I think because of… her years in the White House, in the Senate, have given her the opportunity to explore and to see what is needed for this country,” said state Rep. Terry Alexander (D-Florence). Alexander is the pastor of Wayside Baptist Church in Florence, SC.
Rev. Barnes believes the decision goes much deeper than race.
“We cannot base our decision on our shared ethnicity, but the experience we have. And while Sen. Obama is very qualified (there’s) the experience that comes with Senator Clinton. She’s the one that’s going to put our country back on track. Raised by a woman, I think a woman can do it.”
Okay, let me rephrase that; Bill Clinton, you’re alright with me. Always have been. I got a kick out of seeing you on MTV and playing sax on the Arsenio Hall Show back in the day, and even though it was predictable that your exploitation of the day’s popular culture would lead to the Teflon-coated American Idol wannabe campaign we have now, we can’t really blame you for that, can we? At least it’s not So You Think You Can Dance, cuz Obama-Wan-Kenobe obviously doesn’t think you can.
“Now, I have to say that I would have to investigate more of Bill’s dancing abilities and some of this other stuff before I accurately judge whether he was, in fact, a brother,” Obama said with a grin.
So, hey, who cares if you’re not really the first black president, huh? You don’t have to be black to be cool, sure it helps, but I’ll still give you cool points. But why’d ya have to wimp out and jump on the Oblackguy bandwagon? And if you were gonna do that, why’d ya have to hide behind your wife?
Now, I’m sure you love her ( alright everybody, just keep reading and let that go, okay? ) but I gotta tell ya, you’re not helping her with the “suck-up to the fairytale guy” e-mail you sent out. That bites.
So I hope you’ll take Hillary up on her offer and contribute by midnight tonight for a chance to attend the Denver convention in person. You’ll get to see Hillary speak on Tuesday, and Barack Obama — the next president of the United States — on Thursday.
For the last time, I’m going to lay it out in black and white. Cut it out with the Obama love, alright? I thought I made it clear that nobody likes or appreciates it, and you’re just going to piss us off more if you keep it up. What part of “stuff it” do you and your wife not understand?
I hope you take my words to heart, Bill C., cuz I’d really hate to lose you as a friend. But make no mistake, I can get just as through with a white guy as I can with a black one, so don’t push it, okay?
I found this video on the website, The Real Barack Obama. They claim to have gotten it from another site called The Nose On Your Face. Then, I looked it up on You Tube. It doesn’t matter where it came from, who made it or why, it’s just funny.
First of all, I did not watch the Saddleback conference for one simple reason. I intensely dislike both presidential candidates, and evangelicals, too. There are very few imaginable circumstances ( read: none ) under which I would willingly subject myself to the torture of any sort of experience involving one or two of those entities, much less all three.
In reading (reluctantly, but dutifully) a Politico summary of the debate? conversation? waste of time, money and effort? ( ding! ding! ding! ) I came across a relatively interesting quote from McCain in response to a question about the wisest people in his life:
McCAIN: First one, I think, would be Gen. David Petraeus, one of the great military leaders in American history, who took us from defeat to victory in Iraq, one of the great leaders … I think [civil rights leader and Democratic congressman from Georgia] John Lewis. John Lewis was at the Edmund Pettis Bridge [civil rights march in Selma], had his skull fractured, continued to serve, continues to have the most optimistic outlook about America. He can teach us all a lot about the meaning of courage and commitment to causes greater than our self- interest.
Score, McCain! Now I don’t like McCain ( he’s a Republican ) but that was a greeeeeaaaaaat dig. Smooth and slick, he called Obama a liar in the middle of a faith conference. And seemingly, didn’t even break a sweat. I mean, who can forget these immortal words from The Great Self-Important One?
This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great great-great-great-grandfather had owned slaves; but she had a good idea there was some craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided that we know that the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama.
Now, it doesn’t take Columbo to figure out that an event that happened in 1965 ( Selma march ) had nothing to do with an event that happened in 1961 ( the holy birth ). However, in one smooth, seemingly unrelated statement, McCain, even with his lousy record on Civil rights, smacked Obuhbuhbuh upside the head with his own lie. Slick.
The McCain camp has proven itself adept at exploiting Obie’s many weaknesses. The ads they’ve created and run on You Tube are classic fun, especially because they’re so successful at getting under Obequiet’s skin.
The silliest response to the Britney Hilton ad came from shameless Obie suck-up, Bob Herbert.
Gee, I wonder why, if you have a black man running for high public office — say, Barack Obama or Harold Ford — the opposition feels compelled to run low-life political ads featuring tacky, sexually provocative white women who have no connection whatsoever to the black male candidates.
Sure you wanna go there, Bobby? I mean, while you’re grousing ( unreasonably ) about McCain’s alleged attempt to unfairly connect nubile young white women to a black man, you’re conveniently forgetting that Obama himself is a living testament to the fact that a black man and nubile young white woman got him born.
…and for some reason, they want to give it to Barack Obama. At a fundraiser in San Francisco tonight he raised 7.8 million dollars selling the same spoiled soup warmed over.
“John McCain, all he wants to do is talk about me. They know they can’t win on the issues. So what they’ll do is they’ll try to scare people. He’s risky. He’s risky. We’re not sure.”
Haven’t we heard this before? I guess it makes a difference who you try to sell your fictitious projections to, because in Chicago on June 13, 2008, it only netted him 1.7 million.
“They’re going to try to make me into a scary guy. They’re even trying to make Michelle into a scary person.”
Maybe it was the reference to Michelle that did him in, or maybe, since it was Chicago, they just knew better.
Orrrrrrrrr, it could have been his new, formerly neutral, rah-rah gal Nancy Pelosi who did the trick. They were on her stomping grounds, ya know.
The hometown gal was neutral during the primary, but wasn’t shy about her Obama affection tonight, calling him “a leader that God has blessed us with at this time.”
Barack Obama is not the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party.
Self-important pundits, gasbags and other Obama campaign surrogates can proclaim him to be so from the rooftops to the mountaintops, from the laptops to the tabletop TV’s, but alas and alack, wishin’ don’t make it so.
There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party’s designation.
So, it would seem that neither Obama nor Clinton can officially claim the nomination. Senator Obama owes his bogus status to the endorsement of unpledged, automatic, or “super” delegates. Yet these “super” delegates are not official. The Green Papers explain:
These “Unpledged” delegates go to the Convention officially “Unpledged” (that is, not committed- ahead of time- to vote for any particular presidential contender), though it is well known that many- if not most- of these may very well be privately supporting a presidential contender.
Officially referred to as “unpledged” or “Party Leaders and Elected Official (PLEO) Delegates” in the party bylaws, these delegates will attend the convention as members of their home state delegation and will get to cast a vote for the nominee of the party. Not all PLEOs are superdelegates. In New Mexico, for example, PLEOs are pledged delegates in line with statewide preference at the caucus. Superdelegates are now being referred to by the Hillary Clinton campaign as ‘automatic delegates’.
Nothing in the bylaws requires the so-called “Superdelegates” to declare a candidate preference ahead of the convention, and nothing prohibits them from changing their mind once they declare such a preference.
One more time for the hard of reading, from the Washington Post:
Super Delegates are not elected through the normal primary and caucus process. They are designated by party rules and include high elected officials (members of Congress and governors), party committee members and some former office holders. Unlike delegates awarded through primaries and caucuses, superdelegates are not required to stay pledged to a specific candidate.
As anyone with an IQ greater than their age can plainly see, according to “da rooolz,” Barack Obama has no more claim to presumptive nominee status than Hillary Clinton does. Neither won, as it stands, they both lost. So for all those irrational loony-sounding Obama supporters who keep screaming that Clinton lost; get over it, he did too. Or, keep saying it all you want, but remember, it ain’t necessarily so.
Why do black people feel compelled to vote for Barack Obama? Because he’s black? So what, Clarence Thomas, Condeleeza Rice and Colin Powell are black, too, and I wouldn’t vote for them, either. True, they are Republicans, but is voting for any black Democrat mandatory for a black person to qualify as being truly worthy? Am I less black if I don’t? I hate to break it to you, but I find that kind of thinking ( I won’t dignify it by calling it logic ) stupid.
To those who say, all things being equal, why not give the brother a chance, my response is, equal to what? It’s no secret that I support Hillary Clinton for president; of the major candidates running, I find her to be the best, hands down. That being said, should I still endorse the historic nature of the “first viable black candidate for president?” Given that I am troubled by many aspects of Obama’s candidacy; his campaign tactics, his rather thin resume and his stumbling incoherence when off TelePrompTer, to name a few, why should I get behind someone I’m convinced is destined to fail, just because we share a similar hue? What good does that do for the black community?
Maybe many people feel it is payback time for the historic injustice inflicted on black Americans. That’s fair, but is electing an under-qualified black president the right way to address that issue? In my opinion, true progress cannot be said to have been achieved if freedom to choose based upon issues other than race is not a reality.
I have been impressed with Senator Clinton’s commitment to issues I care about, especially health care. Senator Obama’s stance seems to me to be politically calculated, not personally committed. In fact, it’s hard to find any issue that Obama is for, rather than against. What does he want to do? If we are to believe that we have to let him slide on issues of concern to black America so that he can secure the white vote, how can we be sure that he won’t always be too timid to rock the white boat? This is a gamble I’m personally not willing to take.
Obama’s willingness to use race as a weapon is unacceptable to me. “Vote for me because I’m black” is just not good enough. His eagerness to paint blacks as irresponsible for political purposes makes me uncomfortable and negates any built-in trust he might otherwise deserve based on our common melanin content. I don’t want a president who feels the need to put me down in an effort to make himself look good. I want a president who works for me, not points and shakes his finger at me.
I don’t feel at all compelled to vote for Barack Obama.
Barack Obama’s presidential campaign can honestly be called a Grand Experiment. It’s an experiment that the Democrats are betting will succeed, based largely on the fact that it accounts for Obama’s success in getting elected. To be sure, nobody can seriously claim to be swayed by the candidate’s record of legislative accomplishment, first they’d have to find it. No, it is Obama’s string of victories due primarily to his grassroots organizing efforts that have the party’s heart’s a-twitching like Chris Matthews’ tingly leg. Add Howard Dean’s fifty state strategy to the mix and you have the makings of a beautiful friendship.
Now, four years have passed. And the Democrats have nominated a candidate that seems perfectly equipped to test-drive the party’s 50-state vehicle. Obama has built his candidacy off of the pledge to expand the electoral playing field. Moreover, his campaign has leaned on an ability to drum up both grassroots support and the recruitment of Republicans and independents — two stated objectives of the Dean vision.
On Thursday, Obama symbolically endorsed the DNC’s efforts, declaring that Dean would remain party chairman heading into the general election.
The Obama/Dean association goes back much farther than June of this year, however. In 2004 Howard Dean founded Democracy For America after losing in the presidential primaries that year.
Governor Howard Dean founded Democracy for America in 2004 to build on the grassroots momentum for reform that his bid for the presidency sparked. The movement propelled DFA into a successful national organization committed to the “50 State Strategy.”
Their stated mission on their website is a simple one:
Democracy for America is our nation’s largest progressive political action community. With over 725,000 members nationwide, DFA is a grassroots powerhouse working to change our country and the Democratic Party from the bottom-up. We provide campaign training, organizing resources, and media exposure so our members have the power to support progressive issues and candidates up and down the ballot. Join us in the fight to take our country back!
But a longer statement outlining the group’s mission, dated June 20, 2004, goes into a little more detail:
DFA has a long-term goal that looks past November 2004. This organization will rebuild the Democratic Party from the bottom up — it will take time, but we must start building a base now for the future, just like the Republicans did 40 years ago.
Senator Clinton, for about a week now, I’ve been trying to tell you that if you insist upon pushing this “fauxnity,” or “phonity” (faux or phony unity) on your supporters, well, you can just shove it. Obviously, though, you haven’t been listening. If you had, you would never have sent out this e-mail:
I cannot wait for the lights to come up and the cameras to roll at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. When I join Democrats from across the country who are unified and ready to get to work to elect Barack Obama, I want you there.
The rest of the e-mail went on predictably; blah, blah, blah, help with the debt, blah, blah, blah, elect Senator Obama, blah, blah-de-blah-blah-blah. You’re kidding, right? Are you really asking us (all the people who have supported you because we sincerely believe that if not for a seriously flawed, corrupt nominating process, you, the best candidate in the race, would and should already be the nominee,) to enable you to continue to allow Obama to treat you like Cagney treated Mae Clarke in “Public Enemy”? Give me a break. Has this guy somehow magically become competent, experienced, qualified or acceptable while boogey-boarding in Hawaii? I don’t think so. Which means you leave us no choice. You’ve made your pitch, now I’m taking it upon myself to make our position crystal clear.
Not gonna ride the phony pony, Senator, and as far as I’m concerned, “stuff” has indeed come to “shove.” So take the rah-rah Obaba noise and, well…you know what to do. We told you we’d take it from here, and we’re not finished yet.
Frankly, I don’t care what anybody’s religious affiliation is. Ultimately, in my opinion, every relationship with God is personal, unique and sacred, whether one subscribes to any organized religion or not. However, I do care about a person’s convictions. What are their values? What do they care enough about to fight for? What principles do they believe in?
In the case of Barack Obama, it’s hard to know. His tendency to flip-flop on issues aside, he has shown a disturbing penchant for abandoning people and things one would believe should be dear. When it became politically expedient to denounce his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, the man he proclaims brought him to his faith, he did so. Not only did he renounce his pastor, but, one month later, his church. The timing of his resignation from Trinity United Church of Christ is forever suspect, coming as it did on the day of the DNC’s Rules and By-laws Committee meeting where he was awarded votes not directly cast for him. Was that his reward? If so, what does that say about the man’s character? The strength of his commitment?
Then, there are the persistent Muslim rumors. Though Obama has repeatedly denied any allegiance to the Muslim faith, the rumors refuse to die. On his website there are numeous denials, none of them in his own words, at least as far as I could see in the limited time I allowed myself to peruse it.
“Obama’s campaign aides have emphasized his strong Christian beliefs and downplayed any Islamic connection. The Illinois senator was raised ‘in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother,’ his chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said in a statement in January after false reports began circulating that Obama had attended a radical madrasa, or Koranic school, as a child. ‘To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago,’ Gibbs’ Jan. 24 statement said.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/16/07]
Considering how long his relationship with Trinity lasted after that denial, along with the behavior of his surrogates regarding the seating of two Muslim women at one of his rallies, it’s no wonder that people remain skeptical. To be fair, he apologized directly to the women, but the question remains, what was his staff so afraid of? Why the seeming paranoia? Either he’s a Muslim or he’s not, no big deal. Or is it?
Many people seem to have taken it upon themselves to prove beyond a doubt that he is a Muslim. A blogger by the name of Texas Darlin, claims to have confirmation that on Obama’s registration to an Indonesian school, under the name Barry Sotero, his religion was listed as Muslim. A number of recent books make the same or similar allegations, but again, who cares?
Obama’s refusal to take a definitive stand on core character issues, like his own religion, is troubling. This is 2008, if Obama cannot stand up for who he is, whoever he is, that says more about him as a man than it does about America as a nation. Because more than forty years ago, another black man took on the world, and won.
So Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are in cahoots to pull the wool over PUMAs’ eyes by staging a meaningless roll call in an elaborate show of fake unity at the convention.
“I am convinced that honoring Sen. Clinton’s historic campaign in this way will help us celebrate this defining moment in our history and bring the party together in a strong united fashion,” said Obama, an Illinois senator.
Added Clinton, D-N.Y.: “With every voice heard and the party strongly united, we will elect Sen. Obama president of the United States and put our nation on the path to peace and prosperity once again.”
Are they kidding? If either or both camps and their captains actually think some kind of “shaux” (faux show) is going to satisfy people who honestly believe Obuhbuh to be a piss poor candidate, either, both or all of them are nuttier than a leftover box of decades old fruitcake. Nobody wants having Senator Clinton’s name being placed in nomination to be a merely “symbolic” gesture. We want a fight!
You’d think these “associates,” “surrogates,” and “sources close to…” would understand what they’re up against and try really hard not to piss people off. But, you’d be wrong. Take Donnie Fowler, who doesn’t want a roll call, for instance:
South Carolina superdelegate Donald Fowler is an early and staunch Clinton supporter who has switched to support Obama since Clinton dropped from the contest. Fowler told CQ Politics that entering Clinton’s name at the convention would be a mistake and would present the appearance of a divided party.
“It would be the wrong thing to do by anybody’s definition. … I think Senator Clinton should be honored … but I think that it would absolutely the wrong thing to do and I think she should discourage her supporters from doing that,” he said Wednesday, before the decision had been announced.
This is the same clueless guy who sent out a pissy, open email to all us bitter holdouts about a month ago.
I must confess a bit of fatigue and irritation with people who continue to carp, complain, and criticize the results of the primary and lay down conditions for their support.
However, some people seem to think this sham is a good idea. Like turncoat, just-shy-of-Judas-status-like-Richardson, Lanny Davis, who claims Clinton will not only vote for, but personally nominate her rival.
“I think it’s a perfect solution,” said Davis, who went to Yale Law School with the Clintons and was a special counsel to former President Clinton.
“We are absolutely committed to electing Barack Obama and this is the best way to do it so let people have their moment,” Davis said. “Sen. Clinton will assure that nothing will occur that will hinder Sen. Obama ’s chances but even more will help him by when it comes time for her vote, by voting for him and by moving at the convention to nominate Sen. Obama by acclamation.”
Davis said Clinton will have “no sympathy” for some of her supporters who pledge to continue to try to get her nominated at the convention.
Oh, really, Lanny? Well, if you and HRC truly feel that way, you can both stuff it. My fellow PUMAs and I want a real, open, brokered convention and will continue to work to make that happen. We love the idea of a roll call and having Senator Clinton’s name placed in nomination, but only if she can have a fair and honest chance to be elected and right the wrong being perpetrated by those who are forcibly trying to foist a green candidate on us just because he’s black. The hope that this will come to pass gives us joy, but the suspicion that it won’t will probably cause you, Senators Clinton and Obama, as well as the DNC, a whole lot of pain come November. And you can all ride your phony unity pony to the bank on that.
Well, well, well. It looks like Senator Obama has graciously decided to allow Senator Clinton’s name to be placed in nomination at the Democratic National Convention. Yeah, that’s what it looks like, alright, but that ain’t how it is. This is just the next phase in the epic Clinton/Obama drama, and the outcome is not likely to be the one the media is spinning itself in circles to portray.
Hillary Rodham Clinton’s name will be placed in nomination along with nominee-in-waiting Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention, an emblematic move intended to unite the party after a divisive primary.
“Emblematic?” Don’t bet your boots, Toots. Anybody with half a PUMA brain can clearly see that this is not a concession of any sort, it’s phase one of Senator Obama’s “Help! I’m In Way Over My Head and I Wanna Go Home!” campaign. This guy’s not entirely stupid, he realizes what’s painfully obvious to all but the most Kool-Aid drunk sycophants; he’s bitten off way more than he can chew and is trying desperately to find a way to bow out gracefully. His actions since he “wrapped up the nomination” (did not, neither he nor Clinton have enough pledged delegates to do that) have made him seem like a little kid playing dress-up president, who now doesn’t want to play anymore because there are only big kids left outside. Personally, I hope it works out for him and he does find a way out before he implodes. Otherwise, in a few short weeks, they might be singing this song about him. (And lest anybody think I’m advocating violence against Mr. Obama, get over yourself. It’s a political metaphor, sheesh.)
Black America will wake up and get it, but what we’re dealing with in the black community is just the natural fear of possibility, ok and when I look at my life, you know the stuff that we see in these polls has played out my whole life and I’ve always been told by someone that I’m not ready that I can’t do something, my scores weren’t high enough, you know there’s always that doubt in the back of the minds of people of color, people who have been oppressed, who have never been given the real opportunities that you never really believe, that you believe somehow that somehow someone is better than you, you know deep down inside you doubt that you can really do this cause that’s all you’ve been told is no, wait, that’s all you hear and you hear it from people who love you not because they don’t care about you but because they’re afraid. They’re afraid something might happen to you.
What did she mean, her “scores weren’t high enough?” Was she under-qualified to be admitted to Princeton? Did she get in through Affirmative Action? (After reading the sentence structure of the above quote, I’d guess, yes, if indeed she went at all.) In the same article, she mentions that her father put her through college, but at the end of her schooling she and her husband had a combined loan debt greater than their mortgage. Now, I could not care less about the Obama’s finances, but it seems clear that they did not rely on scholarships. So the question is, how did a working class black couple qualify for admittance to the toniest schools in the country when at least one of them admits she didn’t have the scores?
Barack Obama’s grades and scores are a bit of a mystery. Though I have looked online for definitive answers, none were found. How did he get into college?
“Basically, on every racial issue Barack Obama is walking the tightrope,” Davis says. “The more he supports traditional black issues like affirmative action, the more that will eat into his white base of support.”
That may or may not be true, but how can a man, who has exploited a program for his own benefit, argue against it for political purposes? Doesn’t this turn a simple balancing act into a combat-boot clad, attempted floor exercise on a tightrope, over a minefield?
If you’re Barack Obama, not much. Oh, some might call you a great speaker,
while others might be more impressed with your accomplishments.
But the truth of the matter is, you’re black. Now, personally, I think you should cut it out. I’m not kidding. You should just stop being black so people could stop talking about it. Over and over and over again. So, c’mon, Barack, enough with the black thing already. Would you please just do something, anything, anything at all? Huh?
Have you ever gone to a party that got a little out of hand, so you and your friends were asked to leave? It might not even have been your fault, maybe one of the people you were with got into a hotly contested game of oh, say, Scrabble, and tempers flared over a challenge to the word…”globsmuck.” Now, you and most of the other people observing the game know that “globsmuck” is not a word, but the guy who used it (who you never liked anyway) would have gotten a lot of points and won the game if it had gone unchallenged. But it was challenged because the smarmy guy who made it had a reputation for making up words in Scrabble and always refused to back down. “It’s in the Scrabble dictionary!” he was known to exclaim, knowing full well that the only dictionary available would likely be a ratty old Funk and Wagnalls. In fact, some people would swear that he was not above hiding a Webster’s or two before an anticipated game, if need be. So, figurative lines would be drawn in the carpet, and after all the heated words were exchanged, all the accusations made, all the fingers pointed, (causing marginal friends to almost come to blows) some people would start heading for the exits. At which point the hostess (who was, of course, dating the Scrabble guy) would proclaim “globsmuck” to indeed be a word, awarding him additional double-word points and causing the challenger to forfeit her turn. (And giving time and cover enough for him to slip the tiles he had earlier palmed back in the bag.) The hostess/girlfriend would then declare the cheater the victor before asking the challenger’s friends to leave.
Fast forward a few minutes to the scene on the front lawn of the party site, where all the dis-invitees would be milling about and commiserating before getting in their cars. These angry, grumbling, former party-goers might well spend a little time grousing about being cheated, then unceremoniously tossed out, before deciding to reassemble at one of their numbers’ home to have their own, more harmonious, party. However, some might decide that their former friends were not only wrong about the Scrabble rules interpretations, they had no right to put anybody out in the first place, since the challenger was the hostess’ roommate and thus, wasn’t even one of the people on the lawn! And “globsmuck” is not a word! At this point, a number of the lawn gatherers just might decide to march right back inside and force the Scrabble cheaters to play fair. Some might demand that the cheater’s girlfriend’s roommate come with them to the new party. Others might even want the challenger to move out altogether. No matter which course of action individual members of the the bounced coalition ultimately decided to pursue, they would all probably remain united in spirit against the Scrabble cheater, his suck-up friends who co-signed his cheating (since they conveniently said they couldn’t find a Scrabble dictionary) and his big mouthed, know-it-all girlfriend, whether they really liked her roommate or not.
Donna, PUMAs don’t care what your Mama taught you, “globsmuck” is not a word, and the problem is not with your roomie, it’s you and your lousy, Scrabble cheating boyfriend. So, don’t expect us to bring presents to your stupid wedding, even if you do manage to strong-arm your roommate into being your maid of honor.
Yahoo News is reporting that a new group is being formed to support the “presumptive” Democratic nominee: Republicans For Obama.
The Democrat’s campaign said the group was being spearheaded by former lawmaker Jim Leach of Iowa, former Rhode Island senator Lincoln Chaffee, and Rita Hauser, who was a prominent fundraiser for President George W. Bush.
The renegade Republicans are all “crossing the divide of old politics to support Barack Obama for president,” the Democrat’s campaign said in a statement.
The nerve of these people! How dare they pretend that this is a new organization? Do they think we’re stupid?
Republicans for Obama is a grassroots organization of proud party members who all share one important trait— we are Americans first and Republicans second. (Even if it is a close second.) Founded in late 2006 as part of the nationwide effort to encourage Senator Obama to run for the Presidency, our volunteer-run, grassroots group now includes over 2000 registered members from across the nation.
So, not only are Republicans For Obama not new as an organization, they’ve been around 2 years longer than any of the Democrats supporting McCain groups. You know, the ones that were formed as a backlash against all those corrupt Democrats for Obama. Which corrupt Dems, you ask? The ones who shafted HRC, the ones who think we’re stupid.
Much has been made of race in this election, the race card, who played it and what it means are discussed ad nauseum in the press, throughout the blogosphere, in barbershops, beauty shops, restaurants and everywhere else people gather and talk about current events. But, does anybody have an answer? Probably, but first, you have to ask the right question.
Black voter apathy has been a reality since we won the right to vote. While Civil Rights leaders and black politicians fully understood the power of the ballot, they also realized that people need somebody to vote for. This is not as simplistic as it seems. For most of the past forty-four years black voters were pretty much limited to voting for white politicians, with few exceptions. Barack Obama is the only black sitting United States Senator, and only the third since Reconstruction, out of a total of five. He is the second, in my opinion, Jesse Jackson being the first in 1988, viable black candidate for President in this nation’s entire history. Unquestionably, this is huge. But is it enough? For many blacks, the answer is, no.
The Democrats and Obama have pinned their hopes on grassroots efforts to energize the black base, but haven’t always found the going easy as Amanda Bass, an Obama volunteer found out:
“It’s a monumental challenge,” she said. “You see how mentally shackled and jaded people are, because they’ve seen politicians let them down in the past.”
For many of these disengaged people, racial solidarity with Obama does not automatically trump apathy or despair. Even if volunteers manage to get them registered, it will require intensive follow-up to make sure they know where to vote, have the necessary identification and then turn out.
Obama has never been assured of support from the black community, most black people didn’t know him any better than any other color people did before he burst onto the national scene, and certainly felt no particular allegiance to him as ABC News pointed out in February, 2007:
One might assume that the only person of African descent currently in the race for the White House would automatically get the black vote.
At least that’s what Pastor Manning says. I first saw this video on Sugar N Spice and even though I’ve been aware of Rev.Manning for awhile now (who isn’t?) Sugar deserves props for spotlighting his latest proclamations. Like him or not, he’s a hoot.
Some of “you people,” to paraphrase Obuhbuh, might not know exactly what a Wang Dang Doodle is. Well, nobody’s really sure, but according to Koko Taylor, it sure sounds like a hoot, too.
A lot of Dems are so disgusted with the DNC’s “presumptive nominee” selection that they have either left the party or vowed to actively work against him. Some are doing both. This is a fact. It’s a damned inconvenient fact for the best laid plans of certain people, but it is a fact nonetheless. Understandably, this pisses a lot of those movers and shakers off, to the point that they go to ridiculous lengths to minimize the impact of that fact. They call us deadenders, Clinton diehards, bitter, angry white women, sore losers and crybabies. No big deal, even if some of us are really men, not all of us are white, most don’t feel like we’ve lost yet, and we’re all too pissed to cry. We understand, the wannabe gamers are pissed too, so name-calling is to be expected. But the worst thing they call us is (gasp!) Republicans! Republicans? Why would on earth would Republicans be upset if the Democrats nominate an inexperienced Nutty Professor whose whole campaign is based upon pie-in-the-sky classroom theory? They should be so over-the-moon happy that hell, they could even run an unpopular, uncharismatic old geezer against him if they wanted to, and still expect to win. Calling people who are upset because they feel they are being strong-armed into voting for a candidate they find unacceptable Republicans is just stupid. But, gee, that’s the Howard Dean for you.
The whole Republican smear is pretty dangerous, too, considering that CampO has it’s own dubious associations with the dark side. There’s Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign against Alan Keyes for starters. Alan Keyes?!?!! C’mon, in the whole state of Illinois, (hell the whole country since they had to import Keyes from Maryland) they couldn’t find a more viable candidate against Obuhbuh than Alan Freakin’ Keyes? Obuhbuh who had lost an earlier (2000) election for Congress to Bobby Rush by an embarrassing margin was so intimidating that all the good Republicans were quaking in their boots about the prospect of facing him, except Alan Flippin’ Keyes? Suuuurrrrre, I buy that.
But I admit, I could be wrong, everything could be straight-up and above board; just because a guy has a tendency to benefit from the implosion of his oppositions’ campaigns doesn’t make him a Republican, right? Just like it could be a coincidence of little to no importance that in 2006 a small group of GOPers formed a group called Republicans For Obama for the express purpose, in their words, to “encourage Senator Obama to run for the Presidency.”
Then, there’s the now-famous Democrat For A Day campaign:
Senator, let me first apologize for telling you to “stuff it.” It’s not that I didn’t mean it, I did, but I admit, my words were poorly chosen. Okay, they really weren’t, but they weren’t really respectful, either. The problem is, it’s killing me that you seem to be capitulating to an inferior candidate for no good reason. He hasn’t officially won squat, but you’re enabling him to prance around the world as if he has. Those of us who support your candidacy because we’re still convinced you’re far more capable of handling the office of president frankly don’t like this new, submissive attitude you’ve adopted. We don’t care for the idea of you playing second fiddle to him, either as enthusiastic cheerleader or VP. We want you to fight. We miss the tough broad who wouldn’t give in to the incredible pressure placed upon you by the schemers-in-charge who manipulate the DNC against you and we want you to give them the hell they deserve. You owe them no loyalty, they haven’t shown you any and they don’t seem inclined to without a fight. So fight. Please? We’ll back you up, I promise. ‘Cause I’ll tell you, being force-fed a candidate you can’t stomach makes PUMAs want to hack up the furball of a candidate that’s currently stuck in our throats. And if you don’t fight back, I’m afraid we’re gonna choke. And we’ll still say, no deal.
I have spoken of the Democrats’ desire to tie Barack Obama’s candidacy to the legacy of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy before. That desire is no secret, though it is not given the notice in the media that it deserves. That this is the Democrats year to win is a given, yet the fact that there is a largely unspoken wish to make this election bigger than a mere power grab is, for the most part, being portrayed as an undercurrent to the more widely acknowledged wave of perceived inevitability. However, the symbolism of racial progress that nominating an African American candidate provides is the fuel that powers the engine of the Obama campaign.
Okay, a couple of weeks ago, there was this big brouhaha about the “n-word” on The View. First of all, let me say, yeah, this is late, but hey I didn’t have a blog then, now I do. That’s why I’m just now writing about it, but write about it I must. I hate the “n-word.” Not just “nigger” the word that the “n-word” represents, but the actual stupid-assed euphemism itself.
Of all the awful legacies of the O. J. Simpson trial, which are legion, the birth of the “n-word” as a publicly acceptable alternative to the hateful word “nigger” has to be counted in the top ten. While nothing compares with the crime itself, the effects of many aspects of the trial on our popular culture are probably more profound than we realize. When Christopher Darden bowed to courtroom decorum by coining the “n-word” to replace the word whose effects he was trying to argue against, he not only blunted his own argument, he cursed us all.
There is no most acceptable way to say “nigger.” You either use the word or you don’t. It’s definition and meaning is part of the fabric of America, an ugly reality we have to accept before we can reject. While the derogatory nature of the word “nigger,” the devastating effects it’s use against African Americans has had and the profound negativity and disdain associated with its genesis and lifespan cannot be denied, it is still just a word.
This year’s presidential race is being conducted as a referendum on racial prejudice. If, the theory goes, Barack Obama can be elected to the highest office in the land, that would “prove” once and for all that America has moved beyond race and we, as a nation, have truly become “post racial.”
I’m not nearly so sure that’s true. Hell, I’m not even sure the two things have anything to do with each other. Obuhbuhbuh could be elected and America could still be racially intolerant. Buying into the racism be-gone! magic and mystery of the Obama hype is largely dependent on the magician’s tricks of misdirection and smoke and mirrors.
I don’t think it’s any secret that the anniversaries of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech and the assertion by Robert Kennedy in 1968 that a black man would be president within 40 years are strong motivators for the powers that be to promote a black candidate this year. I’m also pretty sure that the substance of the candidate chosen as well as the substance of the civil rights struggle that both American martyrs championed is not nearly as important as the exploitation of the symbolism attached to them is. Read the rest of this entry »
The blame game is alive and well in this year’s Democratic presidential race race. Yes, this contest is all about race. The Democrats are so desperate to put a black face on the illusion of progress and inclusion that they will not back down from their selected candidate, no matter what legitimate issues are raised about him. If, you don’t support him, you’re racist. If that doesn’t work, it’s one of the Clinton’s fault. That’s always a good one, people have been blaming everything on somebody named Clinton for twenty years; looks like it still works. I mean, Hillary Clinton raises money for Obuhbuhbuh, campaigns for him, encourages her supporters to embrace him, but just because they say “uh-uh, Mrs. C., no can do,” it’s still her fault. Right? Bill Clinton gives an interview that is not critical of the Appointed One, yet he didn’t go nearly far enough to praise His Holy Name, so, it’s his fault, too. Of course. Nobody seems to care that there just isn’t a whole lot in Mr. Obama’s resume to gush over, that little fact just gets in the way of good finger pointing.
Barack Obama and party leaders have been trying to foster a sense of unity as the Illinois senator moves toward formally securing the Democratic presidential nomination at the convention, which starts August 25 in Denver. But Clinton’s supporters refuse to fade away, and some think she could still win the party’s nod with a last-minute campaign to elbow Obama aside.
Yes, we do refuse to fade away, we would like to think she could win the nomination, but we don’t think she should “elbow Obama aside,” we don’t think he should be standing in her way in the first place. Then they say that it is unlikely that Clinton could ge the nomination because his opponents supporters are just as ardent as hers, but they go on to say,
But party leaders are concerned that the Hillary rebels will reopen old wounds and reignite the debate over whether she was treated fairly by Obama and the media as the first woman to be a serious presidential contender. Such a split could lead to an embarrassing mess in Denver just when Obama needs all the positive vibrations he can generate. He holds a slim lead over Republican John McCain nationally in the opinion polls.
“Reopen old wounds?” When did they close? “Positive vibrations?” We can sing happy songs all day long and Obama just isn’t going to look any better unless there’s a lot of drinking going along with the songfest.
But the kicker is, next they move on to quote the ever-popular “unnamed source” who chimed in with this,
“What usually happens is, if you lose, you go silent for a while,” says an Obama strategist. “But Hillary’s supporters haven’t gone silent. They’re still out there in the news.”
“They went negative on us (in the primaries),” he adds. “But we didn’t fight fire with fire. It could’ve been scorched earth, but that’s not where our guy is.”
So, let me see if I’ve got this straight. We were supposed to shut up, then endorse. But CampO believes bringing up distorted pictures of the primary contest, where their candidate talked about Senator Clinton’s “claws coming out,” her inability to run on her own (“I don’t know who I’m running against sometimes”) her lack of foreign policy experience, her time in the White House, etc. shows how positive he’s been in the face of all HRC’s negativity.
Well, I’ve got news for you, buddy. The only thing these kinds of baseless attempts at justification accomplishes is to remind those of us who don’t like you anyway, why we don’t like you anyway. It seems to me that those who support Obama should start making the case about why he should be given the nomination that he has not yet officially won, since last I looked he had 1766 pledged delegates and it takes 2118. Presumably he’ll make up the difference at the convention, that’s what conventions are for, but whether or not you think that’s a good thing depends upon your opinion of Senator Obama. Not Bill Clinton, not Hillary Clinton, not PUMA. Maybe instead of acting like the president and blaming everybody who doesn’t think you are, you could try telling them why you should be and then, asking them, nicely to let you.
And try not to mention the black thing, we can see that much.
Or whoever that was impersonating you in that “delightful” live web chat thingy. Boy, was that depressing. “I look forward…President Obama…party unity…blah, blah, blah, blah, freaking, blah.” I’m telling you, that just warmed the cockles of my heart, and if you knew how cold my heart cockles usually are, well, then, okay, huh?
Did Senator Clinton really have to do this? Was it even really her? Are her supporters really interested in the kind of generic topics of the questions “she” answered? “What goals do you have?” “I wanna be president, someday, too.” “You really wanna be VP, do ya, huh?” “Will you talk to me at the convention?” Or were we getting pre-approved Obuhbuhbuh camp drivel typed by enthusiastic CampO volunteers, tickled to death by being in on such a clever little ruse? Or was it something even more sinister? Did Obuhbuhbuh threaten to get some of his “peeps” to make arrangements to keep Bill and Chelsea out of the country indefinitely? Has anyone actually seen Hillary Clinton today?
I dunno. Somethings up. Otherwise, this screwy rah-rah Obahbah crap was a major letdown after a big hope-raising buid-up. I just can’t believe that HRC would willingly do that. But then, I never thought I’d tell her to stuff it, either.
Are we any closer to having Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s name placed in nomination at the Democratic National Convention in a meaningful way than we ever were? Who the hell knows? But the internet is a-buzzing, the blogosphere is a-humming and the jungle drums are a-beating with speculation, dread and hope. Of course the hope comes from the PUMA faction of the Dems, many of whom have honestly taken to reading tea leaves and studying body language trying to find and hold onto any hint of validation of the seriousness of their resolve to reject the “selected” nominee, while the dread is from the selectors whose fear is that they just might be forced to give in. To them, I say, “goody, goody, gumdrop, it’s your own damned fault, nyah, nanananaaa.” The Kennedy, Kerry, Dean, Brazile cabal should have been honest from the beginning and owned up to the fact that the significance of the anniversaries of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream Speech” and Robert Kennedy’s assassination trumped all else as far as they’re concerned, and that it was important to them to “prove” that America has lived up to it’s promise of racial equality whether that’s really true or not. Maybe the appearance of progress is enough to bring it about, maybe not, but at least if they’d been up front about it people could stop wondering why they were going to such lengths to support a candidate whose biggest asset seems to be his race. As it stands people are now committed to ousting those they feel are responsible for perpetrating a fraud, cheifly Donna Brazile, who promised to resign if super delegates determined the outcome of the primaries, as it appears they have.
“We are working together to make sure the fall campaign and the convention are a success. At the Democratic Convention, we will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party will be fully unified heading into the November election.”
What the hell does that mean? Maybe Senator Clinton will tell us in her conference call tommorrow, but I gotta tellya, if she plans to say anything along the lines of, “I think it’s in the best interests of the Democratic party, blah, blah, blah, vote for Senator Obama, blah, blah ,blah…” like she did here:
“I happen to believe that we will come out stronger if people feel that their voices were heard and their views were respected. I think that is a very big part of how we actually come out unified,” Clinton, D-N.Y., said at a California fundraiser last Thursday, in a video clip captured by an attendee and posted on YouTube.
“Because I know from just what I’m hearing, that there’s incredible pent-up desire. And I think that people want to feel like, ‘OK, it’s a catharsis, we’re here, we did it, and then everybody get behind Sen. Obama.’ That is what most people believe is the best way to go,”
I’m gonna have to politely tell Ms. Clinton to stuff it. Okay, I’d never really say that, but I’m just about as likely to vote for Obuhbuhbuh. Hopefully, Mrs. Clinton will surprise us all and say something like, “I’ve had a lot of time to think about it, and I’m still in it to win it!” That would be sweeeeeeet! But whatever she says, I’ll still believe she’s the best candidate for president who entered into the race this year, and I wouldn’t care if she was blue.
PUMA
Just Say No Deal
So, maybe we’re not quite there, yet, maybe we’re close, but either way, come on feet, start moving:
Shoulda been. I mean, what better song to describe the candidacy of the Precious Presumptuous Nominee for the Leader of the Entire Free World and All 58 States of the Republic, than “Is That All There Is”? There should be a new verse written, set to music and blared from the back of a Partridge Family VW bus at the DNC convention in Denver. PUMAs the world over could sit at home, munching popcorn, drinking beer, clinging to their guns and Bibles (I guess with their hands full of firearms and religious tracts they’d have to enjoy their snacks and drinks hands-free, but hey, we PUMAs are animals, right?) happily singing along while the farcical travesty that is this year’s nominating process implodes on national tv.
We’d sing:
“Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
If that’s all there is, my friends, then let’s keep dancing, let’s break out the booze and have a ball
If that’s all
There is
I remember in the beginning of the primaries when we had a strong, talented candidate to go along with the one we have now, and the people voted for her, but the big-headed know-it-alls in charge kept pushing for us to accept Obama-the-Lesser as our choice, as he was theirs. And I remeber listening to him during the debates, hearing him say over and over again, “Umm, uhhh, what she said” and thinking to myself, is that all there is to this guy?
Barack Obama is a funny guy. And most people are sick of him. I never knew he had a sense of humor, and when people try to tell me he himself is a joke, I immediately tell them not to say that so loud, he’s sensitive. Besides, his overly-devoted followers are too zoned out to risk kidding around with, they only have two gears, mindless devotion and outrage. But as it turns out, he’s not nearly as tight-assed uptight as he appears. When asked why he decided to run for president, Shecky Obama replied, “I got hit on the head with a rock…When I woke up, I’d made my announcement and then it was too late. “
Maybe rip-roaring humor like that is what’s causing almost half of the people recently surveyed by the Pew Research Center to respond that they’re hearing too much about him lately. One third of the Democrats (probably PUMAs) surveyed feel that way. I’d be willing to bet that a similar survey limited to Hillary Clinton supporters would have yielded a much higher percentage, probably in the high nineties.
Now, I would never advocate violence of any kind, but finding the guy who threw the first stone that got us into this mess and enticing him to chuck another well aimed missile to get us out of it, might not be a bad idea.
Okay, this is my first foray into blogging, so bear with me and be kind. By way of introduction, I used to be fairly famous in another life (well, it seems like another life) but now I’m pretty much perpetually pissed. Like many staunch HRC supporters, most of my wrath these days is directed squarely at the DNC and their Barackenstienian candidate. While it is universally accepted that some ninety plus percent of African Americans embrace this politically created embodiment of an erroneous interpretation of a long ago dream, I am proudly, and firmly entrenched in the other plus or minus upper 10 percent of the black population.
Why any self-respecting black American would support this man is beyond my meager abilities to comprehend. He’s a snob, who at every opportunity gleefully puts “y’all” (his favorite word for black people) down. “Y’all” know what I’m talking about” he’ll drawl in his fake, pseudo-ghettoese, usually right after slamming “y’all” for embarrassing him around white people. “Y’all” are lousy parents, “y’all” are lazy, and “y’all” are too stupid to help your equally stupid kids with their homework. “Y’all” feed your kids leftover Popeye’s chicken and soda for breakfast and “y’all” don’t even know how to act in a parent-teacher conference, even if “y’all” can tear your trifling self away from Sport Center and get your lazy butt up off the couch long enough to pretend to care enough to go.
According to this new “Man of the Black People” the best way to tell if somebody is really black is to watch him dance, and according to his wife, if you don’t embrace this Great Black Hope, it’s probably because you’re so stuck in a slave mentality induced stupor you need to be slapped awake so you can “get it.”
But see, we black people understand game. We have a long tradition of telling white people what they want to hear just to get them out of our faces. (Think Rochester and Mr. Benny. If you’re too young to remember, here’s a little clip.) We also know the code words when we hear them, so we know that “y’all” is not really “us;” the Savior Senator is just shucking and jiving and we’re not being bamboozled and hoodwinked. We smart.
Now, the reason white people embrace this transcendent, transformational, just-black-enough symbol of the promise of America’s future and triumph over its’ past is simple. White people have a thing about black people with funny names. Especially if that name starts with “O”. Think about it, Oprah, Omarosa, Barack Obama. These names work like gris-gris on unsuspecting Caucasians. As soon as they hear these names they go into a trance-like state, the likes of which have not been seen in America since the Beatles first appeared on Ed Sullivan. These poor innocent descendants of Europeans seem to become hopelessly lobotomized zombie-changelings upon the mere mention of these incantations disguised as names and can’t seem to stop themselves from giving these funny-named black people money. Why else would Omarosa ever have a job?
So, as anyone can plainly see, the political science lab created candidate with the magic voodoo name and the conveniently caramel skin is simply unstoppable. To some, this realization is a comfort, a fulfillment, even a wonder to behold. To the non-delusional, non-believers, however, it’s just freaking creepy.
In future posts, I will share my rarefied vision and angry, yet enlightened viewpoints with those with the wisdom and clarity of thought to resist watching the bright shiny object move back and forth that Dr. Deanmento and his bargain basement Bush’s brain clone of an assistant Brazile are dangling in front of us. Hopefully I will learn how to do all the website tricks that serve to enhance such verbal treasures as I have to offer but until then, righteous indignation, ridicule, scorn and derision will simply have to do.
Oh, boy. Yesterday I thought this year’s presidential campaign would be a snoozefest from now on, but was I wrong! The hits just keep coming!
I have had just about enough of Obama supporters, DeaNC shills, Mainstream media pundits, and any and all other assorted apologists for The Chosen One, yelling and screaming from here to there about how Hillary Clinton has to do everything she can to help The Delicate Flower win. Why? Why should she lift one well manicured finger to help him do anything? Isn’t he The Great and Powerful Dragon Slaying Conqueror? Didn’t he defy all odds to defeat the omnipotent Clinton Machine, obliterating the entitlement of the heinous aristocracy Hillary arrogantly believed herself to be rightful heiress to? Or did I miss something?
In an article in 
“Things are fine, no really, go on about your business, there’s nothing to see here. Ease on down the road. Go on, now, git!”
How can people entrusted with so much responsibility be so clueless? For anybody to think that you can make a sham nomination of a fraudulent candidate legitimate by forcing people to pretend they’re cool with it, is so amazingly stupid that it’s hard to believe that anyone with mental ability beyond what it takes to scrabble on walls with a crayon could think of it, let alone try to pull it off. But hey, that’s 
I can’t tell you how relieved I am to read so many articles going to such extraordinary lengths to reassure me, and the rest of the world, that Barack Obama is still black. Who knew? Now, I know that I have, on occasion, told him to cut it out. I mean, how far can you go with the black thing? How much of this “vote for me because I’m black, y’all” or “prove you’re not a racist, vote for my black half,” are we all supposed to endure? Well it seems that a lot of the media don’t agree with me. They seem to think you can never have too much of a good thing.
It’s getting hot in herrre, so take off all yo…oh, wrong song. Anyway, it’s getting hot in Denver. We know the police are prepared for any eventuality, but is the fire department? ‘Cause 
The media schmoos ( a much nicer word than “whores” ) are trying to hypnotize the voting public into believing that unity is possible in the Democratic Party, and that Hillary Clinton can, will and should make it happen. Uh-uh. Ain’t gonna happen. No matter how many shiny objects they dangle in front of our eyes, no matter how many times they repeat their mantra ( “She will release her delegates, she will release her delegates…” ) makes no difference whatsoever. Whether this is a carefully orchestrated campaign being launched by the DeaNC and the Obamacrats, or if the media schmoos are taking it upon themselves to promote this nonsense, it will fall flat. Because it’s not about Hillary. It’s about Barack. We don’t want him to be president. Period. Exclamation point! Get it, 
The fact that the reality of lowered expectations towards black Americans impacts Barack Obama’s candidacy is something I have written about before in a post called 
Barack Obama is not the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party.
C’mon PUMAs, Hillocrats and Clintonistas, let’s send Hillary some love! The woman ran an historic campaign in the face of tremendous odds and against the turning tide of her t
Barack Obama and his newly selected running mate have already gotten off on the stupid foot. Likening John McCain to George Bush at their kickoff event in Springfield, Illinois today, 
Though the selection of Joe Biden as Barack Obama’s running mate is being 
People are so clueless. There’s a theory floating around that Hillary Clinton not only owes it to her party to deliver her supporters to Barack Obama, there’s a belief that such a thing can be done. ‘Fraid not. When will people get it through their heads that people chose to vote for Clinton, they did not pledge allegiance to her? Voters looked at the candidates running and made a decision, as they always do. However, none of those voters agreed at any point to follow HRC blindly.
Spit it out, man. You’re getting the hell on everybody’s nerves. C’mon, Barack, if you really know who you want your VP to be, and they agree to do it ( which, from what I understand, is no sure thing ) wouldja just tell somebody and get it over with? Good golly, Miss Molly, you’re really starting to piss me off.
First of all, a reasonable ( or, unreasonable ) person might well ask, “What the hell is a “schmoo?” The short answer is, that it’s my made-up name for Obamabots. But that doesn’t tell the whole story. When I was a kid, long, long ago, in a land far, far away ( Chicago ) I remember seeing ads for a Milton-Bradley board game called “Schmo.” Though I never played, nor owned, the game, I loved the ad’s tagline, “Don’t be a schmo.” This game did not last long, in fact I could not find a single reference to it online. But, I know it was real, dammit! Wasn’t it?
)
Hillary Clinton just can’t win with some people. If she runs for president, 
News flash?
There’s a universally accepted truism in the black community that African Americans have to “be twice as good to get half as much.” This perception is evidenced by the obvious fact that some non-black people receive perks and benefits that black people with similar qualifications do not. African Americans are not alone in this perception of the treatment they receive, women and other minorities have expressed similar complaints about their positions in American society.
