That's Palin on the right in the white cap - her debate coach on the right, practicing on the McCain compound.I didn't realize the debate was going to be an outdoor event.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Picture of the day: Debate camp
That's Palin on the right in the white cap - her debate coach on the right, practicing on the McCain compound.I didn't realize the debate was going to be an outdoor event.
President Obama reassures Americans
Barack Obama delivered a powerful speech in Reno, Nevada today on the economic crisis.
If you are feeling frightened and depressed, do yourself a favor and read all of it here.
Believe me, it will lift your spirits and you will only wish that he could be president today.
Hypocrisy
I don't care how politically incorrect this is, I'm going to say it.
What I see of Sarah Palin these days does not convince me in any way she is a good mother. I know she isn't running for mother of the year, but since the GOP makes such a big issue of family values, perhaps they should lead by example.
In fact, Palin's mothering reminds me a lot of the Republican approach to the issue of pregnancy and parenting. Focus all your attention on the fetus, and making sure it is born, but disregard the welfare of the child after its birth.
After parading her infant son around on the day of the big announcement and at the convention, the baby and mother seem permanently separated. Now I know she is not in the public spotlight every minute, but she certainly has been busy lately...visiting all those Middle Eastern potentates at the United Nations, giving speeches, giving interviews, debate prep, buying new suits, having her hair done, etc. How on earth does she do it?
Has she never heard of the importance of maternal bonding? Who is taking care of that baby? Does he travel with her or is he back in Alaska with Bristol, whom I assume is back in Alaska as she too disappeared after the convention? If the baby is with her, I'm glad he doesn't accompany her to rallies, but for pete's sake, when does she have time to be a parent? When does Todd for that matter, as he is always trailing behind her?
I've seen the other two girls with her - not usually together, but one at a time. What about their schooling? We have heard nothing about that. When John and Elizabeth Edwards were campaigning and brought their children with them, they made sure we knew they were being schooled on the campaign trail. But Sarah Palin says nothing about this, as if the children are mere props with no needs of their own. (Or maybe Sarah Dolittle is too busy with her own schooling these days.)
Don't give me that sexist crap. At least one parent needs to be taking care of an infant for optimal development most of the time. Even young children need a lot of contact with parents. Michelle Obama does not campaign during the week so she can be with her girls. On the weekends, her mother is there. How do we know? She and Barack told us.
Since Todd is always with his wife, he isn't the parent watching over the children. Maybe they have a nanny - provided by the McCain campaign. But a nanny just doesn't cut it. Yeh, sure, royal families always had nannies look after their young, and look how all of them turned out. Raving lunatics, most of them. And even if they have a nanny, the children are far away from their home, their friends, their schools, and a normal routine. Is that good parenting? Is there no other available qualified woman (since we know McCain chose a woman for purely political reasons) in the Republican Party, someone without a young family including a four month old special needs infant?
I can't comprehend how any self-respecting Conservative Republican "values voter" could look favorably on this scenario without knowing they were being hypocritical. I don't look favorably on it and I consider myself a liberal and a feminist. So I just don't see how these people who supposedly care so much about the family can square that with supporting a woman candidate who is such a poor role model.
Oh, right. It doesn't matter how she parents - only that she didn't have an abortion.
As long as you "choose life" I guess it doesn't matter what kind of a life that child lives.
What I see of Sarah Palin these days does not convince me in any way she is a good mother. I know she isn't running for mother of the year, but since the GOP makes such a big issue of family values, perhaps they should lead by example.
In fact, Palin's mothering reminds me a lot of the Republican approach to the issue of pregnancy and parenting. Focus all your attention on the fetus, and making sure it is born, but disregard the welfare of the child after its birth.
After parading her infant son around on the day of the big announcement and at the convention, the baby and mother seem permanently separated. Now I know she is not in the public spotlight every minute, but she certainly has been busy lately...visiting all those Middle Eastern potentates at the United Nations, giving speeches, giving interviews, debate prep, buying new suits, having her hair done, etc. How on earth does she do it?
Has she never heard of the importance of maternal bonding? Who is taking care of that baby? Does he travel with her or is he back in Alaska with Bristol, whom I assume is back in Alaska as she too disappeared after the convention? If the baby is with her, I'm glad he doesn't accompany her to rallies, but for pete's sake, when does she have time to be a parent? When does Todd for that matter, as he is always trailing behind her?
I've seen the other two girls with her - not usually together, but one at a time. What about their schooling? We have heard nothing about that. When John and Elizabeth Edwards were campaigning and brought their children with them, they made sure we knew they were being schooled on the campaign trail. But Sarah Palin says nothing about this, as if the children are mere props with no needs of their own. (Or maybe Sarah Dolittle is too busy with her own schooling these days.)
Don't give me that sexist crap. At least one parent needs to be taking care of an infant for optimal development most of the time. Even young children need a lot of contact with parents. Michelle Obama does not campaign during the week so she can be with her girls. On the weekends, her mother is there. How do we know? She and Barack told us.
Since Todd is always with his wife, he isn't the parent watching over the children. Maybe they have a nanny - provided by the McCain campaign. But a nanny just doesn't cut it. Yeh, sure, royal families always had nannies look after their young, and look how all of them turned out. Raving lunatics, most of them. And even if they have a nanny, the children are far away from their home, their friends, their schools, and a normal routine. Is that good parenting? Is there no other available qualified woman (since we know McCain chose a woman for purely political reasons) in the Republican Party, someone without a young family including a four month old special needs infant?
I can't comprehend how any self-respecting Conservative Republican "values voter" could look favorably on this scenario without knowing they were being hypocritical. I don't look favorably on it and I consider myself a liberal and a feminist. So I just don't see how these people who supposedly care so much about the family can square that with supporting a woman candidate who is such a poor role model.
Oh, right. It doesn't matter how she parents - only that she didn't have an abortion.
As long as you "choose life" I guess it doesn't matter what kind of a life that child lives.
Further craziness in the American electorate
With everything at stake in this election.....
What to do about an unpopular war that should never have been waged and that is emptying our treasury,
How to rescue the economy which is sinking further into recession,
How to bring back the middle class and jobs,
How to fix our broken health care system,
How to protect the planet from the devastating effects of global warming,
How to secure retirement income for the baby boomers, in light of the current losses in people's 401Ks and the problems with Social Security,
And so on.....
Doesn't it seem completely insane that any voter would:
Vote against Obama just because he is black...
Vote for McCain just because his vice presidential nominee is a woman...
Vote for McCain because he was a POW nearly forty years ago...
Vote against Obama because of false rumors about his religion and crazy sermons of his former pastor...
Vote for McCain-Palin because they want to overturn Roe V. Wade?
What to do about an unpopular war that should never have been waged and that is emptying our treasury,
How to rescue the economy which is sinking further into recession,
How to bring back the middle class and jobs,
How to fix our broken health care system,
How to protect the planet from the devastating effects of global warming,
How to secure retirement income for the baby boomers, in light of the current losses in people's 401Ks and the problems with Social Security,
And so on.....
Doesn't it seem completely insane that any voter would:
Vote against Obama just because he is black...
Vote for McCain just because his vice presidential nominee is a woman...
Vote for McCain because he was a POW nearly forty years ago...
Vote against Obama because of false rumors about his religion and crazy sermons of his former pastor...
Vote for McCain-Palin because they want to overturn Roe V. Wade?
The candidate is unqualified! Nothing else matters.
It's both amusing and sad to read and listen to the commentary about the upcoming Palin-Biden debate.
Conventional wisdom seems to be that Biden must be careful, not seem like he's miles ahead of Palin, be somewhat deferential without being condescending.
This is so ridiculous. How exactly is he supposed to treat her? Like a child, like a frail woman, like the ignoramus that she is? No matter what he does she will look like unqualified, and the press is so in the tank for McCain that they are trying to set this up to be his fault.
Are the pundits really saying that if he treats her like he would treat anyone else in a debate, like an equal, that he will be doing something wrong?
The Republicans have been playing a very cynical and dangerous game with their no-nothing vice presidential candidate. They have been crying "sexist" if anyone is a little rough with her, and then acting sexist themselves in shielding her from the press because the press isn't "deferential." They want us to believe she is qualified to be vice president, but they don't want anyone to treat her the way a vice presidential candidate would be treated. Does no one else see the glaring contradiction here?
Can we please stop this crazy-ass charade? The woman is unqualified! Nothing else matters - especially not Biden's behavior in the debate. And it has nothing to do with her being a woman. It has to do with her being completely ignorant of all the things a vice presidential candidate ought to be familiar with. How is that Joe Biden's problem?
Were she a man, hiding from the press, demanding deferential treatment, giving stupid answers to questions from voters and the press, she would have been laughed off the stage long before now.
Conventional wisdom seems to be that Biden must be careful, not seem like he's miles ahead of Palin, be somewhat deferential without being condescending.
This is so ridiculous. How exactly is he supposed to treat her? Like a child, like a frail woman, like the ignoramus that she is? No matter what he does she will look like unqualified, and the press is so in the tank for McCain that they are trying to set this up to be his fault.
Are the pundits really saying that if he treats her like he would treat anyone else in a debate, like an equal, that he will be doing something wrong?
The Republicans have been playing a very cynical and dangerous game with their no-nothing vice presidential candidate. They have been crying "sexist" if anyone is a little rough with her, and then acting sexist themselves in shielding her from the press because the press isn't "deferential." They want us to believe she is qualified to be vice president, but they don't want anyone to treat her the way a vice presidential candidate would be treated. Does no one else see the glaring contradiction here?
Can we please stop this crazy-ass charade? The woman is unqualified! Nothing else matters - especially not Biden's behavior in the debate. And it has nothing to do with her being a woman. It has to do with her being completely ignorant of all the things a vice presidential candidate ought to be familiar with. How is that Joe Biden's problem?
Were she a man, hiding from the press, demanding deferential treatment, giving stupid answers to questions from voters and the press, she would have been laughed off the stage long before now.
Still stuck in the eighties
Another sober essay in the N.Y. Times, this time by David Brooks:
I’ve spoken with several House Republicans over the past few days and most admirably believe in free-market principles. What’s sad is that they still think it’s 1984. They still think the biggest threat comes from socialism and Walter Mondale liberalism. They seem not to have noticed how global capital flows have transformed our political economy.
We’re living in an age when a vast excess of capital sloshes around the world fueling cycles of bubble and bust. When the capital floods into a sector or economy, it washes away sober business practices, and habits of discipline and self-denial. Then the money managers panic and it sloshes out, punishing the just and unjust alike.
What we need in this situation is authority. Not heavy-handed government regulation, but the steady and powerful hand of some public institutions that can guard against the corrupting influences of sloppy money and then prevent destructive contagions when the credit dries up.
The brainwashing of America
Bob Herbert's op-ed in the New York Times provides an excellent commentary of what happened yesterday. In short, the chickens of conservative Reagonomics have come home to roost.
While placing most of the blame on Republicans ideologues, Herbert reserves some blame for the American people.
How is it, I have often wondered, that so many voters have been willing to support these idiots, these voodoo economists as Bush I once called them? I think the simple answer is right wing talk radio. Rush Limbaugh and his acolytes have been brainwashing simple minded citizens for decades, and it was largely these listeners who flooded Congress with calls to vote against the bailout bill. Listening to some of these people give their opinions you realize they have no idea there is any connection between Wall Street and Main Street. They're determined to punish Wall Street for its excesses, not even realizing they are punishing themselves. And Limbaugh has so demonized liberals and moderates with his cult following that he was able to convince them that this bill would convert the country into a "socialist" nation. Now, unless another bill comes forward that is acceptable to a majority in Congress, we will be a third world nation.
Thanks Mr. Limbaugh! You idiot!
Americans would do well to turn off their radios. Boycott talk show ideologues who only spread ignorance and misinformation, and learn to read a newspaper and think for yourselves.
Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what is best for this country, nor does he care. He cares only about himself. He hasn't even been able to put the needs and wants of one other person (like one of his three wives) before his own. Why would he care about your needs?
Shut the damn thing off!
While placing most of the blame on Republicans ideologues, Herbert reserves some blame for the American people.
Voters have to shoulder a great deal of the blame for the economic mess the country is in. Too many were willing, for whatever reasons, to support politicians who spat in the eye of economic common sense. Now the voodoo that permeated conservative economic policies for so many years has come back to haunt us big-time.
How is it, I have often wondered, that so many voters have been willing to support these idiots, these voodoo economists as Bush I once called them? I think the simple answer is right wing talk radio. Rush Limbaugh and his acolytes have been brainwashing simple minded citizens for decades, and it was largely these listeners who flooded Congress with calls to vote against the bailout bill. Listening to some of these people give their opinions you realize they have no idea there is any connection between Wall Street and Main Street. They're determined to punish Wall Street for its excesses, not even realizing they are punishing themselves. And Limbaugh has so demonized liberals and moderates with his cult following that he was able to convince them that this bill would convert the country into a "socialist" nation. Now, unless another bill comes forward that is acceptable to a majority in Congress, we will be a third world nation.
Thanks Mr. Limbaugh! You idiot!
Americans would do well to turn off their radios. Boycott talk show ideologues who only spread ignorance and misinformation, and learn to read a newspaper and think for yourselves.
Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what is best for this country, nor does he care. He cares only about himself. He hasn't even been able to put the needs and wants of one other person (like one of his three wives) before his own. Why would he care about your needs?
Shut the damn thing off!
Monday, September 29, 2008
Can it get more ridiculous?
I've always known the American people are pretty damn stupid, but this election season has turned into farce. Nobody's even trying to sound intelligent anymore. Everyone is playing games and telling lies and taking sides for completely insane reasons.
McCain gets a phone call from Obama last week asking him to agree to the two of them putting out a joint statement about the bailout plan. McCain ignores him and goes on television saying he is suspending his campaign to go back to Washington to rescue the economy. He leaves Obama in the dust and then does not really suspend his campaign, nor go immediately back to Washington. First he and Bill Clinton need to massage each other's egos at Clinton's big shindig in N.Y. and then McCain goes back for some kind of photo op at the White House with the lame duck, only the lame duck has also invited Obama and so McCain pouts at the meeting/photo op because Obama shows some leadership.
McCain then plays coy with Obama and the debate commission, refusing to say whether he will participate. Obama heads down to the debate and McCain blinks, then spends 90 minutes refusing to look at Obama and scowling at the camera. The media think McCain did well. The viewers think he looks like a grumpy old man. Then he returns to Washington where he spends some time on the phone talking to legislators, ostensibly getting them to agree to vote for the bailout.
On Monday morning, before the vote, McCain takes credit for its impending success, then blasts Obama for "phoning it in," which is exactly what McCain did. Then the republicans throw a snit fit and refuse to vote for the bill McCain has already taken credit for getting passed. The poor pitiful republicans say they voted against it because big bad Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings. How did she hurt their feelings? She dared to tell the truth - that this entire problem started with Saint Ronny Reagan and is the result of the Republican love affair with deregulation. If you want the republicans to vote for a bill, I guess, you can't tell anyone the truth about them.
As a result, the Dow dropped 777 points and 1.2 trillion dollars was lost by the American people. And god only knows what will happen tomorrow or the next day or the next. Well, we do know Joe Biden is supposed to debate Sarah Dolittle on Thursday, if she doesn't have to rush back to Alaska to repair an oil pipeline or something.
In the meantime, the drama of Sarah Dolittle, the fake candidate, continues, with McCain holding her hand for a second interview with Katie Couric. Seems little Sarah had an oops moment when a voter asked her about Pakistan. She did a big "no-no" by saying what Barack Obama said, which is if we have to cross the border we will. This is a big "no-no" because Uncle Johnny wants to attack Obama for saying it (even though he would probably do exactly the same thing) and now he can't because little Sarah said it. So now he has to be her chaperone. Asked by Couric if she feels she is ready to be vice president, she says "not only ready, but willing and able, if we are so blessed by the American people." (I really wish she would stop that evangelical-babble - the American people vote, they don't "bless.")
And as the American people sink deeper and deeper into recession, and wonder if they will have jobs tomorrow, the media pundits debate about the upcoming debate. Is Sarah Dolittle really that stupid or has she been "overcoached?" How will she do on Thursday? Will Biden blow it by not being nice enough to her? After all she is just a girl. I even heard David Gergen, someone I usually credit with intelligence, using a golf metaphor to describe Sarah's problem: too many coaches spoil the swing. How he could continue to insist she is qualified for the job of vice president is beyond me. This continuing defense of such an unqualified person makes the pundits sound just like the sycophants who praised the naked emperor's new clothes.
Can it get more ridiculous?
McCain gets a phone call from Obama last week asking him to agree to the two of them putting out a joint statement about the bailout plan. McCain ignores him and goes on television saying he is suspending his campaign to go back to Washington to rescue the economy. He leaves Obama in the dust and then does not really suspend his campaign, nor go immediately back to Washington. First he and Bill Clinton need to massage each other's egos at Clinton's big shindig in N.Y. and then McCain goes back for some kind of photo op at the White House with the lame duck, only the lame duck has also invited Obama and so McCain pouts at the meeting/photo op because Obama shows some leadership.
McCain then plays coy with Obama and the debate commission, refusing to say whether he will participate. Obama heads down to the debate and McCain blinks, then spends 90 minutes refusing to look at Obama and scowling at the camera. The media think McCain did well. The viewers think he looks like a grumpy old man. Then he returns to Washington where he spends some time on the phone talking to legislators, ostensibly getting them to agree to vote for the bailout.
On Monday morning, before the vote, McCain takes credit for its impending success, then blasts Obama for "phoning it in," which is exactly what McCain did. Then the republicans throw a snit fit and refuse to vote for the bill McCain has already taken credit for getting passed. The poor pitiful republicans say they voted against it because big bad Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings. How did she hurt their feelings? She dared to tell the truth - that this entire problem started with Saint Ronny Reagan and is the result of the Republican love affair with deregulation. If you want the republicans to vote for a bill, I guess, you can't tell anyone the truth about them.
As a result, the Dow dropped 777 points and 1.2 trillion dollars was lost by the American people. And god only knows what will happen tomorrow or the next day or the next. Well, we do know Joe Biden is supposed to debate Sarah Dolittle on Thursday, if she doesn't have to rush back to Alaska to repair an oil pipeline or something.
In the meantime, the drama of Sarah Dolittle, the fake candidate, continues, with McCain holding her hand for a second interview with Katie Couric. Seems little Sarah had an oops moment when a voter asked her about Pakistan. She did a big "no-no" by saying what Barack Obama said, which is if we have to cross the border we will. This is a big "no-no" because Uncle Johnny wants to attack Obama for saying it (even though he would probably do exactly the same thing) and now he can't because little Sarah said it. So now he has to be her chaperone. Asked by Couric if she feels she is ready to be vice president, she says "not only ready, but willing and able, if we are so blessed by the American people." (I really wish she would stop that evangelical-babble - the American people vote, they don't "bless.")
And as the American people sink deeper and deeper into recession, and wonder if they will have jobs tomorrow, the media pundits debate about the upcoming debate. Is Sarah Dolittle really that stupid or has she been "overcoached?" How will she do on Thursday? Will Biden blow it by not being nice enough to her? After all she is just a girl. I even heard David Gergen, someone I usually credit with intelligence, using a golf metaphor to describe Sarah's problem: too many coaches spoil the swing. How he could continue to insist she is qualified for the job of vice president is beyond me. This continuing defense of such an unqualified person makes the pundits sound just like the sycophants who praised the naked emperor's new clothes.
Can it get more ridiculous?
A lesson for Sean
Yesterday was an interesting day in which I had an important conversation with my 7 year old grandson Sean, pictured here with his five year old sister, Grace.
His mom and dad are enthusiastic supporters of Obama, and when mom drives the kids anywhere they count Obama and McCain signs. In their particular liberal area, Obama is winning 85 to 20. Mirroring their parents, the kids are enthusiastic about Obama. Yesterday Sean asked why anyone would support McCain. This was an important teaching opportunity, so after discussing it with my daughter, I had a little conversation with Sean.
I reminded him of what his mother had already told him, that different people look for different things in a president. I told him that some people think Obama is too young, or doesn't have enough experience. I told him that some people like Obama's ideas and others like McCain's. But then I went to the race issue, something which had never occurred to my grandson, who goes to school with children of all races and nationalities.
I told him simply that some people would not vote for Obama because of his dark skin.
He looked at me like I was crazy and asked why anyone would do that.
I gave him a brief history lesson, told him about the settlement of America, and the kidnapping and enslavement of Africans in the early years of our country. Then I told him about the Civil War, and about segregation, in simple ways he could understand, though he still found it hard to comprehend how people could act this way. I told him I found it hard to understand too.
He was full of questions. Whey did the white people do that? Why did they think the dark-skinned people weren't human? Weren't there some good white people who didn't do this and who told the other white people it was wrong? Why didn't the slaves run away? Didn't anybody help them? And then with a look of horror he asked "Do people still kidnap people and make them slaves today?
I answered each of these questions as honestly and simply as I could, but I realized as I gave him the answers how hollow they sounded, how utterly inadequate. Because there is nothing - NOTHING - that can explain to a seven year old how it is that one group of people thought another group of people property to be bought and sold, whipped and chained and even killed.
Like most seven year old boys, Sean has a rich fantasy life, some of it reinforced by movies. He loves Harry Potter and Star Wars and Indiana Jones. Each of these dramas are rich with the fantastic and the unbelievable. Sean has no trouble suspending disbelief when he watches the movies or acts them out with friends on the playground.
What he does have trouble believing is that an adult might not vote for Barack Obama because of the color of his skin. That is simply beyond his ability to comprehend.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Shotgun wedding rumors
The Republicans have really, truly, lost their marbles.
There is speculation out there, with teasing from some McCain insiders, that a plan is in the works for a Bristol Palin shotgun wedding prior to the election, to be used as a campaign distraction to bring voters back to McCain. How exactly they calculate that, I'm not sure.
I guess these totally loopy wingnuts think the American people will develop a case of wedding fever and come rushing back to support Sarah Dolittle and her dysfunctional - but all American according to her followers - family when her 17 year old pregnant daughter marries an 18 year old hockey bum who said he never wanted to have kids.
Now I've given this some thought and I am of two minds.
Part of me would love to see this - it would give the late night comedians fodder for weeks and the SNL skits would be priceless. It would be the final chapter in the joke that was once Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, and would-be vice president. It would, of course, ensure the election of Barack Obama, as even the least informed voter would see through this charade. I can't even describe how disgusting such a political ploy would be. Never again could the Republicans say Palin's family was off limits. And by ensuring her total defeat, it would mean the first female president or vice president would not be a total numbskull. (The first female president or vice president must be eminently qualified, or it will surely be a long time until we elect another.)
But the other part of me is not looking at this politically. The other part of me is looking at this from the perspective of a mother and a psychotherapist. No one who marries at the age of 17 or 18 will have a good and a happy marriage. Those few shotgun marriages that endure are frought with disappointment and pain. Most, however, end in divorce, and many are characterized by spousal abuse. Obama talks about being born to a teenage mother, but his parents were divorced after two years, and he only remembers seeing his father once, when he was ten years old. Furthermore, it does not appear that young Levi, the father of Bristol Palin's baby, is very mature. I doubt he wants any part of this, and thus such a marriage will not be good for Bristol or the baby. It is one thing to become pregnant at the age of 17 and decide to have the baby - that is to be admired. It is quite another to compound one problem with another. And getting married at this young age will add an enormous problem to Bristol's already large burden.
Were I Bristol Palin's mother, I would give her love and support and a home for her and the baby for as long as she wanted to stay with the family. I would urge her to wait and see if in two or three years time she still thought marriage was a good idea. If young Levi proves his devotion over that time and becomes a responsible young man, willing to work hard and even educate himself, willing to remain faithful to the mother of his child, then the marriage might have a chance. But it has no chance now, and Sarah Palin - if she has any common sense at all, which is becoming increasingly doubtful - should know that.
The second part of me wins out. I really hope Sarah Palin takes her role as Bristol's mother seriously and tells her not to get married. I certainly hope she doesn't further humiliate her daughter with a politically motivated spectacle of a wedding.
I know she doesn't have the smarts to be the vice president, but I certainly hope she has the smarts to be a decent mother. I'm not at all sure, however, that she does.
There is speculation out there, with teasing from some McCain insiders, that a plan is in the works for a Bristol Palin shotgun wedding prior to the election, to be used as a campaign distraction to bring voters back to McCain. How exactly they calculate that, I'm not sure.
I guess these totally loopy wingnuts think the American people will develop a case of wedding fever and come rushing back to support Sarah Dolittle and her dysfunctional - but all American according to her followers - family when her 17 year old pregnant daughter marries an 18 year old hockey bum who said he never wanted to have kids.
Now I've given this some thought and I am of two minds.
Part of me would love to see this - it would give the late night comedians fodder for weeks and the SNL skits would be priceless. It would be the final chapter in the joke that was once Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, and would-be vice president. It would, of course, ensure the election of Barack Obama, as even the least informed voter would see through this charade. I can't even describe how disgusting such a political ploy would be. Never again could the Republicans say Palin's family was off limits. And by ensuring her total defeat, it would mean the first female president or vice president would not be a total numbskull. (The first female president or vice president must be eminently qualified, or it will surely be a long time until we elect another.)
But the other part of me is not looking at this politically. The other part of me is looking at this from the perspective of a mother and a psychotherapist. No one who marries at the age of 17 or 18 will have a good and a happy marriage. Those few shotgun marriages that endure are frought with disappointment and pain. Most, however, end in divorce, and many are characterized by spousal abuse. Obama talks about being born to a teenage mother, but his parents were divorced after two years, and he only remembers seeing his father once, when he was ten years old. Furthermore, it does not appear that young Levi, the father of Bristol Palin's baby, is very mature. I doubt he wants any part of this, and thus such a marriage will not be good for Bristol or the baby. It is one thing to become pregnant at the age of 17 and decide to have the baby - that is to be admired. It is quite another to compound one problem with another. And getting married at this young age will add an enormous problem to Bristol's already large burden.
Were I Bristol Palin's mother, I would give her love and support and a home for her and the baby for as long as she wanted to stay with the family. I would urge her to wait and see if in two or three years time she still thought marriage was a good idea. If young Levi proves his devotion over that time and becomes a responsible young man, willing to work hard and even educate himself, willing to remain faithful to the mother of his child, then the marriage might have a chance. But it has no chance now, and Sarah Palin - if she has any common sense at all, which is becoming increasingly doubtful - should know that.
The second part of me wins out. I really hope Sarah Palin takes her role as Bristol's mother seriously and tells her not to get married. I certainly hope she doesn't further humiliate her daughter with a politically motivated spectacle of a wedding.
I know she doesn't have the smarts to be the vice president, but I certainly hope she has the smarts to be a decent mother. I'm not at all sure, however, that she does.
Sarah Dolittle - reflection on McCain or the American people?
The Sarah Dolittle distraction that John McCain foisted on this country is no doubt a reflection on his judgment, his patriotism and his putting country first.
Sarah has proven in her sparse interviews that she is completely unprepared to be vice president, let alone - god forbid - president. NO SERIOUS PERSON can deny that - they can try, but in the privacy of their own minds, they can't. She is the most unqualified person (including Dan Quayle) ever in my lifetime to run for this office. She makes Katherine Harris look sane and rational.
So why did McCain choose her? His campaign needed excitement, and he wanted to appeal to women. He needed a distraction from Obama's magnificient speech. In short he chose her as a sort of political viagra, to inject life into his lifeless campaign. And every time he praises her as he did in the debate, and this morning on ABC, he mocks the voters and shows his cynical ploy will continue.
In choosing someone so unqualified for this office, when we are at war in two countries, fighting terrorism and a financial crisis at the same time, things that require the utmost qualifications and preparedness in candidates, he has failed his first test of judgment. But beyond that, he has shown contempt for the country, a lack of patriotism in his willingness to put his ambition before his country, indeed mocking his own slogan "Country First."
But what of the voters, the tens of thousands who screamed like maniacs at the convention, the thousands who show up in awe of this person from the frozen tundra? What does this say about them?
It says several things. It says many of them are willing, like the presidential candidate, to put party before country. It says that many of them don't see reality because they have been fooled by the myths the Republican Party is spinning about her.
But it says something even worse, I think, and we have seen this also in the past two elections when another unqualified candidate won the presidency. It says that a significant number of voters are not at all interested in the qualification of a candidate. It shows they have absolutely no clue as to how important the offices of president and vice president are. It shows them treating the presidential election as a beauty contest, or a popularity contest, like something that might take place in high school, or on American Idol. It shows utter disregard for the seriousness of governing this nation, and the seriousness of the situations we find ourselves in.
In short, it shows that a signficant number of voters in this country are not qualified themselves to make the decision they will make on November 4th.
Sarah has proven in her sparse interviews that she is completely unprepared to be vice president, let alone - god forbid - president. NO SERIOUS PERSON can deny that - they can try, but in the privacy of their own minds, they can't. She is the most unqualified person (including Dan Quayle) ever in my lifetime to run for this office. She makes Katherine Harris look sane and rational.
So why did McCain choose her? His campaign needed excitement, and he wanted to appeal to women. He needed a distraction from Obama's magnificient speech. In short he chose her as a sort of political viagra, to inject life into his lifeless campaign. And every time he praises her as he did in the debate, and this morning on ABC, he mocks the voters and shows his cynical ploy will continue.
In choosing someone so unqualified for this office, when we are at war in two countries, fighting terrorism and a financial crisis at the same time, things that require the utmost qualifications and preparedness in candidates, he has failed his first test of judgment. But beyond that, he has shown contempt for the country, a lack of patriotism in his willingness to put his ambition before his country, indeed mocking his own slogan "Country First."
But what of the voters, the tens of thousands who screamed like maniacs at the convention, the thousands who show up in awe of this person from the frozen tundra? What does this say about them?
It says several things. It says many of them are willing, like the presidential candidate, to put party before country. It says that many of them don't see reality because they have been fooled by the myths the Republican Party is spinning about her.
But it says something even worse, I think, and we have seen this also in the past two elections when another unqualified candidate won the presidency. It says that a significant number of voters are not at all interested in the qualification of a candidate. It shows they have absolutely no clue as to how important the offices of president and vice president are. It shows them treating the presidential election as a beauty contest, or a popularity contest, like something that might take place in high school, or on American Idol. It shows utter disregard for the seriousness of governing this nation, and the seriousness of the situations we find ourselves in.
In short, it shows that a signficant number of voters in this country are not qualified themselves to make the decision they will make on November 4th.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
The irrelevance of Kissinger and McCain
The back and forth about Kissinger last night - about whether or not Kissinger agrees with McCain or Obama regarding meeting with Iran - is completely irrelevant. Not because Iran is irrelevant, but because Kissinger is.
This is an 85 year old man, Secretary of State to the most disgraced president in the nation's history. He is a relic of the Cold War and we have no evidence that he has anything of value to add to today's foreign policy debates. I thought it laughable when Sarah Dolittle met with him last week, and I thought it ridiculous that his name came up last night.
Who the hell cares what this old man thinks. Seventy percent of the electorate is too young to even know who he is.
But McCain's dependence on Kissinger as an advisor is emblematic of what is unacceptable about McCain as a presidential candidate. He is a product of the Cold War and Vietnam. He is too old, his ideas no longer applicable to the rapidly changing and interconnected world.
Obama and his young supporters (including this 61 year old grandmother) know we can no longer live in a world of black and white, friend and foe, good and evil, victory and defeat. This world is so small now, with travel between countries so rapid, that we must find new ways to relate to each other.
This week we learned that McCain cannot communicate with his fellow Republicans by telephone or computer. He must travel by plane to meet personally with them to convince them to support some yet unknown position he has on the bailout plan. This alone makes him unqualified to lead in the modern world. And we learned last night that he is still caught up in Reagan's failure in Lebanon, the Cold War with the USSR ("I looked into Putin's eyes and I saw three letters: K.G.B."), his time as a POW during the Vietnam War, and some antiquated notion of victory and defeat.
Obama, on the other hand, understands the world we live in and knows how differently we must approach it.
Kissinger is irrelevant, and McCain's reliance on Kissinger makes him irrelevant as well.
This is an 85 year old man, Secretary of State to the most disgraced president in the nation's history. He is a relic of the Cold War and we have no evidence that he has anything of value to add to today's foreign policy debates. I thought it laughable when Sarah Dolittle met with him last week, and I thought it ridiculous that his name came up last night.
Who the hell cares what this old man thinks. Seventy percent of the electorate is too young to even know who he is.
But McCain's dependence on Kissinger as an advisor is emblematic of what is unacceptable about McCain as a presidential candidate. He is a product of the Cold War and Vietnam. He is too old, his ideas no longer applicable to the rapidly changing and interconnected world.
Obama and his young supporters (including this 61 year old grandmother) know we can no longer live in a world of black and white, friend and foe, good and evil, victory and defeat. This world is so small now, with travel between countries so rapid, that we must find new ways to relate to each other.
This week we learned that McCain cannot communicate with his fellow Republicans by telephone or computer. He must travel by plane to meet personally with them to convince them to support some yet unknown position he has on the bailout plan. This alone makes him unqualified to lead in the modern world. And we learned last night that he is still caught up in Reagan's failure in Lebanon, the Cold War with the USSR ("I looked into Putin's eyes and I saw three letters: K.G.B."), his time as a POW during the Vietnam War, and some antiquated notion of victory and defeat.
Obama, on the other hand, understands the world we live in and knows how differently we must approach it.
Kissinger is irrelevant, and McCain's reliance on Kissinger makes him irrelevant as well.
Sarah Palin as Eliza Dolittle?
It just dawned on me that John McCain is treating Sarah Palin like a modern day Eliza Dolittle - a crass, unpolished, but attractive woman who is plucked from obscurity to be the object of a bet. Henry Higgins wanted to prove he could transform a poor, crude flower seller from the streets of London into a high class member of the British upper class. He took her in, shielded her during her tutoring sessions, and waited until she was ready to present her to society. It took a long time but he succeeded. That, of course, was fiction put to music.
No matter how talented they are, however, John McCain and his campaign are not Henry Higgins. No matter how much they shield her, no matter how much training she gets, they won't transform her the way Professor Higgins transformed Eliza Dolittle. All Eliza Dolittle had to do was get rid of her accent and learn to talk and walk like a lady in a time when that was all that was expected of women. She didn't have to know the intricacies of foreign and domestic policy. The task of McCain was not to turn Sarah into a graceful and dignified ornament. His task was to turn her into a competent national leader. Had Henry Higgins tried to transform Ms. Dolittle into a British Lord, he could not have succeeded either.
The debate
I don't take notes while I watch a debate, so unlike reporters who caught some gaffes on the part of one or the other candidate, I just rely on my overall impression, and my overall impression confirmed my general sense of the candidates that I held prior to the debates.
Obama was gracious and engaging, willing to say McCain was right on numerous occasions, (being deferential?) before he pointed out the areas in which he thought McCain was wrong. Obama was also knowledgable and competent. He knew his facts, he had a clear idea of where he wanted to take the country, and he attempted to speak directly to McCain and make eye contact, though McCain never let him. He seemed relaxed and conversational, calling McCain by his first name, but being firm when he needed to be. He let McCain get in a few good hits, even unfair and dishonest ones, but he has done that throughout the campaign and so tonight was really no different. Obama doesn't get ruffled or show a lot of emotion, and he sometimes just brushes off attacks. This makes people like me, and the rest of his supporters, nervous and impatient for him to hit back, but his strategy seems to work. Slow and steady. Don't get defensive or distracted. Keep looking ahead. It works well for him.
McCain, on the other hand, was decidedly ungracious. He started the debate by making his announcement that Sen. Kennedy was in the hospital, which made him look silly as it had already been reported that Sen. Kennedy had gone home. After that one attempt to be gracious to someone from the opposing party, he treated Obama like he was some kind of gum stuck to his shoe. He repeatedly said "Senator Obama doesn't understand" and then Obama showed he did understand. He never once made eye contact, never once spoke to Obama, never once called him by his first name. He alternated between looking angry and putting on that silly fake smile that is a cover for the simmering contempt he has for his rival.
And finally, McCain seemed old, and more comfortable with the past than the present. He kept referring to Reagan, and Lebanon, and World War II. He reminded me of an elderly Latin teacher I once had who was brought out of retirement to be a substitute for an ailing colleague. The sub brought in projects her former students had constructed over the years - amateur models of great Roman architecture, which were crumbling and full of cobwebs. She thought it gave her credibility with us. We thought it pathetic. I felt a bit that way last night while watching McCain. He really is simply too old and out of touch with today's realities for this job.
I felt the press was mostly rooting for Obama. They have turned on McCain this week, after he turned on them, and they have lost patience with his stunts and his no-nothing vice presidential nominee. They wanted Obama to score a "knockout." They wanted him to attack and finish McCain off, because they are tired of following McCain around on his wild goose chases and trying to figure out his nonsensical strategy. And they have stopped pretending that Sarah Palin is in the same league as other vice presidential nominees (except for maybe Dan Quayle and even Quayle looks qualified when compared to her.)
While I once think they wanted to keep the race close so their ratings would be up until the last minute, I now think they have tired of McCain playing them. They take themselves more seriously than that. So they're not going to cut him a break like they once did. Even the conservative reporters are disappointed in McCain.
We've had a surprise a minute in this election season, but last night's debate held no real surprises, once McCain finally decided to show up. At times last night I thought McCain was angry because he was forced to attend a debate which he thought he had weasled out of. But on second thought, I believe he appeared angry simply because he despises Obama.
And one final note. Instead of showing us he is the "maverick," McCain had to say he was. Instead of showing us he was experienced, McCain had to keep claiming he was. Instead of showing bipartisanship, McCain had to keep saying he was bipartisan. Instead of being the dignified hero of the Vietnam War, McCain had to remind people of his time as a POW.
When you have to remind people of things about you that everyone once believed, it means people no longer believe it. That isn't a good sign.
Obama was gracious and engaging, willing to say McCain was right on numerous occasions, (being deferential?) before he pointed out the areas in which he thought McCain was wrong. Obama was also knowledgable and competent. He knew his facts, he had a clear idea of where he wanted to take the country, and he attempted to speak directly to McCain and make eye contact, though McCain never let him. He seemed relaxed and conversational, calling McCain by his first name, but being firm when he needed to be. He let McCain get in a few good hits, even unfair and dishonest ones, but he has done that throughout the campaign and so tonight was really no different. Obama doesn't get ruffled or show a lot of emotion, and he sometimes just brushes off attacks. This makes people like me, and the rest of his supporters, nervous and impatient for him to hit back, but his strategy seems to work. Slow and steady. Don't get defensive or distracted. Keep looking ahead. It works well for him.
McCain, on the other hand, was decidedly ungracious. He started the debate by making his announcement that Sen. Kennedy was in the hospital, which made him look silly as it had already been reported that Sen. Kennedy had gone home. After that one attempt to be gracious to someone from the opposing party, he treated Obama like he was some kind of gum stuck to his shoe. He repeatedly said "Senator Obama doesn't understand" and then Obama showed he did understand. He never once made eye contact, never once spoke to Obama, never once called him by his first name. He alternated between looking angry and putting on that silly fake smile that is a cover for the simmering contempt he has for his rival.
And finally, McCain seemed old, and more comfortable with the past than the present. He kept referring to Reagan, and Lebanon, and World War II. He reminded me of an elderly Latin teacher I once had who was brought out of retirement to be a substitute for an ailing colleague. The sub brought in projects her former students had constructed over the years - amateur models of great Roman architecture, which were crumbling and full of cobwebs. She thought it gave her credibility with us. We thought it pathetic. I felt a bit that way last night while watching McCain. He really is simply too old and out of touch with today's realities for this job.
I felt the press was mostly rooting for Obama. They have turned on McCain this week, after he turned on them, and they have lost patience with his stunts and his no-nothing vice presidential nominee. They wanted Obama to score a "knockout." They wanted him to attack and finish McCain off, because they are tired of following McCain around on his wild goose chases and trying to figure out his nonsensical strategy. And they have stopped pretending that Sarah Palin is in the same league as other vice presidential nominees (except for maybe Dan Quayle and even Quayle looks qualified when compared to her.)
While I once think they wanted to keep the race close so their ratings would be up until the last minute, I now think they have tired of McCain playing them. They take themselves more seriously than that. So they're not going to cut him a break like they once did. Even the conservative reporters are disappointed in McCain.
We've had a surprise a minute in this election season, but last night's debate held no real surprises, once McCain finally decided to show up. At times last night I thought McCain was angry because he was forced to attend a debate which he thought he had weasled out of. But on second thought, I believe he appeared angry simply because he despises Obama.
And one final note. Instead of showing us he is the "maverick," McCain had to say he was. Instead of showing us he was experienced, McCain had to keep claiming he was. Instead of showing bipartisanship, McCain had to keep saying he was bipartisan. Instead of being the dignified hero of the Vietnam War, McCain had to remind people of his time as a POW.
When you have to remind people of things about you that everyone once believed, it means people no longer believe it. That isn't a good sign.
Friday, September 26, 2008
The inmates have taken over the asylum
This has got to be a dream, right? I'm going to wake up right before the car goes off the cliff, right? This isn't going to end like Thelma and Louise, is it?
There may or may not be a debate tonight depending on whether John McCain stops playing games in Washington and gets his ass down to Mississippi.
Bush pops out of the Oval Office for two seconds to reassure the markets that just opened and basically says: Legislation being made isn't pretty but we'll have an agreement."
Sarah Palin talks sarah-babble to Katie Couric and in effect says she is an expert on Russia not just because she can see Russia from Alaska but also because Putin flies over Alaska. Then she says Henry Kissinger is "naive."
Dave Letterman calls John McCain out on his show when McCain bailed saying he was hopping a plane back to Washington (24 hours later, it turns out.)
Bill Clinton can't bring himself to praise Obama, though he says he will campaign for him - after the Jewish holidays. He also spends ooodles of time praising McCain and Palin. In the meantime bloggers are trying to decide if this is a wise political gambit that will help McCain, or more of Clintons's anger and resentment that Obama defeated his wife.
My bank just failed and was taken over by the fed, then sold to J.P. Morgan Chase.
House republicans who want to scuttle the bailout bill are proposing cuts in capital gains taxes and some kind of insurance scheme to help out. (Nothing like the hair of the dog.)
Pastors from 22 states will endorse McCain from the pulpit on Sunday in the first salvo of a legal strategy to allow them to retain their tax exempt status no matter how much they try to screw up our political system with their god talk and fairy tales.
The inmates truly have taken over the asylum.
Because as much as I would like it to be, this isn't a dream I will wake up from.
There may or may not be a debate tonight depending on whether John McCain stops playing games in Washington and gets his ass down to Mississippi.
Bush pops out of the Oval Office for two seconds to reassure the markets that just opened and basically says: Legislation being made isn't pretty but we'll have an agreement."
Sarah Palin talks sarah-babble to Katie Couric and in effect says she is an expert on Russia not just because she can see Russia from Alaska but also because Putin flies over Alaska. Then she says Henry Kissinger is "naive."
Dave Letterman calls John McCain out on his show when McCain bailed saying he was hopping a plane back to Washington (24 hours later, it turns out.)
Bill Clinton can't bring himself to praise Obama, though he says he will campaign for him - after the Jewish holidays. He also spends ooodles of time praising McCain and Palin. In the meantime bloggers are trying to decide if this is a wise political gambit that will help McCain, or more of Clintons's anger and resentment that Obama defeated his wife.
My bank just failed and was taken over by the fed, then sold to J.P. Morgan Chase.
House republicans who want to scuttle the bailout bill are proposing cuts in capital gains taxes and some kind of insurance scheme to help out. (Nothing like the hair of the dog.)
Pastors from 22 states will endorse McCain from the pulpit on Sunday in the first salvo of a legal strategy to allow them to retain their tax exempt status no matter how much they try to screw up our political system with their god talk and fairy tales.
The inmates truly have taken over the asylum.
Because as much as I would like it to be, this isn't a dream I will wake up from.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Sarah-babble
Actual response from Sarah Palin to question from Katie Couric about the proposed bailout:
First, reducing taxes has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief? Does she have a clue what she is saying? Does she just throw words together?
Second, she makes George W. Bush sound eloquent.
Third, I would love to have my old eighth grade teacher, Sister Joan Marie, ask her to diagram one of those sentences.
That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it’s got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade — we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation.
First, reducing taxes has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief? Does she have a clue what she is saying? Does she just throw words together?
Second, she makes George W. Bush sound eloquent.
Third, I would love to have my old eighth grade teacher, Sister Joan Marie, ask her to diagram one of those sentences.
The cost of the debate "cancellation"
In this campaign John McCain has become a "born again feminist" with his choice of Sarah (blessed by a witchdoctor) Palin and a "born again regulator" now that his failed ideology is causing the economy to tank along with his presidential campaign. Now he is trying to be a "born again populist" suspending his campaign because he puts "country first."
The Obama campaign has been saying for months that McCain is out of touch, that his 11 houses and 13 cars and isolation from real people other than Alaskans has made him incapable of understanding how Washington and Wall Street devastates Main Street.
Well he did it again - showed how out of touch he is. Only this time he is the one threatening Main Street. He is the one threatening to cause Ole Miss to lose 5.5 million dollars and the local hotels, motels, and restaurants to lose out as well.
McCain pulls another stunt because he puts "McCain first" and as ususal a Republican will cost ordinary citizens a lot of money.
This guy makes me want to vomit almost every day.
The Obama campaign has been saying for months that McCain is out of touch, that his 11 houses and 13 cars and isolation from real people other than Alaskans has made him incapable of understanding how Washington and Wall Street devastates Main Street.
Well he did it again - showed how out of touch he is. Only this time he is the one threatening Main Street. He is the one threatening to cause Ole Miss to lose 5.5 million dollars and the local hotels, motels, and restaurants to lose out as well.
McCain pulls another stunt because he puts "McCain first" and as ususal a Republican will cost ordinary citizens a lot of money.
This guy makes me want to vomit almost every day.
Voting for wisdom
The big question voters need to ask themselves this November: Is there anything - ANYTHING - that Republicans haven't screwed up this past year? And should we really trust them with another four years?
What has gone right in foreign policy? Iran's on the verge of getting nukes; the situation in Israel is worse; the Iraq War should never have happened and has cost us nearly a trillion dollars and over 4000 lives; our indebtedness to China threatens our security; our dependency on foreign oil is greater than ever, and most of the world hates us. Oh yes, and Osama bin Laden is still in business.
What has gone right in domestic policy? Forty -seven million Americans with no health insurance; no real investment in alternative energy production; the many failures of FEMA; a faith based Centers for Disease Control; a gutted justice system; an executive branch in clear violation of the Constitution. Oh yes, and an economy on the verge of collapse.
I remember when the "grown-ups" as they called themselves, came to Washington in 2000 after the Supreme Court threw the election to them. They said they were going to bring dignity to the White House because Bill Clinton's sexual appetite had thrown dignity away.
Well, I think dignity requires more than not having sex in the oval office. Dignity means governing with wisdom and intelligence, knowing what you are doing, and getting it right at least some of the time.
They have gotten everything wrong - EVERYTHING. And if the economy crashes, as it just might, no one will have any dignity left as they stand in unemployment lines and go to soup kitchens to find food.
We can't afford to give another four years to people who have no clue how to govern, but know how to distract and pull stunts and get all upset about sexual matters.
Can't we please, this time, put someone into the White House who knows what he is doing?
What has gone right in foreign policy? Iran's on the verge of getting nukes; the situation in Israel is worse; the Iraq War should never have happened and has cost us nearly a trillion dollars and over 4000 lives; our indebtedness to China threatens our security; our dependency on foreign oil is greater than ever, and most of the world hates us. Oh yes, and Osama bin Laden is still in business.
What has gone right in domestic policy? Forty -seven million Americans with no health insurance; no real investment in alternative energy production; the many failures of FEMA; a faith based Centers for Disease Control; a gutted justice system; an executive branch in clear violation of the Constitution. Oh yes, and an economy on the verge of collapse.
I remember when the "grown-ups" as they called themselves, came to Washington in 2000 after the Supreme Court threw the election to them. They said they were going to bring dignity to the White House because Bill Clinton's sexual appetite had thrown dignity away.
Well, I think dignity requires more than not having sex in the oval office. Dignity means governing with wisdom and intelligence, knowing what you are doing, and getting it right at least some of the time.
They have gotten everything wrong - EVERYTHING. And if the economy crashes, as it just might, no one will have any dignity left as they stand in unemployment lines and go to soup kitchens to find food.
We can't afford to give another four years to people who have no clue how to govern, but know how to distract and pull stunts and get all upset about sexual matters.
Can't we please, this time, put someone into the White House who knows what he is doing?
Campaigns in a nutshell
From Roger Cohen at the New York Times:
This is why the older generation still favors McCain and the younger generations favor Obama. The younger generations understand the interconnectedness of the world, the need for diplomacy rather than threats, and they don't share the jingoism of the "greatest generation." It's not that they don't love this country. It's that they know it is suicide to love this country and hate the world.
The younger generation also feels much more comfortable with a candidate with brown skin. The younger generation has traveled around the world, and gone to school with people of all skin hues who speak multiple languages. The older generation, on the other hand, fought in World War II in a segregated army, and grew up when segration was the reality of America. The world of John McCain and those older than him is gone.
This really is a transformational election and that is why, no matter what stunts McCain pulls (and the only way he can win is with stunts that fool just enough people), Obama will win, and if we are a wise people, by a much larger margin than people think.
It is a changing world, and we need a candidate who represents and understands the need for America to change.
I’m going to try to make this simple. On the Democratic side you have a guy whose campaign has been based on the Internet, who believes America may have something to learn from other countries (like universal health care) and who’s unafraid in 2008 to say he’s a “proud citizen of the United States and a fellow citizen of the world.”
On the Republican side, you have a guy who, in 2008, is just discovering the Net and Google and whose No. 2 is a woman who got a passport last year and believes she understands Russia because Alaska is closer to Siberia than Alabama.
This is why the older generation still favors McCain and the younger generations favor Obama. The younger generations understand the interconnectedness of the world, the need for diplomacy rather than threats, and they don't share the jingoism of the "greatest generation." It's not that they don't love this country. It's that they know it is suicide to love this country and hate the world.
The younger generation also feels much more comfortable with a candidate with brown skin. The younger generation has traveled around the world, and gone to school with people of all skin hues who speak multiple languages. The older generation, on the other hand, fought in World War II in a segregated army, and grew up when segration was the reality of America. The world of John McCain and those older than him is gone.
This really is a transformational election and that is why, no matter what stunts McCain pulls (and the only way he can win is with stunts that fool just enough people), Obama will win, and if we are a wise people, by a much larger margin than people think.
It is a changing world, and we need a candidate who represents and understands the need for America to change.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
A bad dream?
It's late and I'm tired and if I wake up tomorrow and this post makes no sense I may have to delete it, but for now, while completely sober, I feel I have entered an alternate universe or I'm living in a very bad dream.
McCain, the presidential candidate of the party that created an economic crisis with their trickle-down supply side deregulated free market bullshit, is now going to mount his white horse, or private jet, and ride into Washington so that he can fix it.
Of course that means he will have to cancel the presidential debate on Friday night and move it to next Thursday, which is when the vice presidential debate was going to be, and oh by the way if the economy isn't fixed by the rescheduled vp debate that may have to be cancelled too.
And veep nominee, baby Sarah, was taken out on a field trip to the United Nations so she could meet with some important people but she wasn't allowed to talk to reporters. She still hasn't held a press conference or answered any questions from reporters other than Charlie Gibson, softball Sean, and Katie Couric and she bombed all of them. Still the base loves her, and a Kenyan minister prayed over her that no witchcraft would harm her.
John McCain's campaign chairman was still raking in $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac while McCain wants to blame Obama for the entire economic meltdown.
Forty percent of the country think Sarah Palin, whom they don't really know as she is kept in seclusion, is fit to be vice president and the harder they try to cram knowledge into her head, the more crazy mixed up it comes out.
Meanwhile - two wars go on, that crazy president of Georgia is being interviewed about his country's problems, the environment continues to deteriorate, oil prices go up and Bush just gave the most coherent speech of his presidency where he tried his best to create a panic in the country.
Bush will leave office soon and we still don't know if that insane McCain might replace him.
And no one from the current administration is in jail.
I don't understand any of this.
McCain, the presidential candidate of the party that created an economic crisis with their trickle-down supply side deregulated free market bullshit, is now going to mount his white horse, or private jet, and ride into Washington so that he can fix it.
Of course that means he will have to cancel the presidential debate on Friday night and move it to next Thursday, which is when the vice presidential debate was going to be, and oh by the way if the economy isn't fixed by the rescheduled vp debate that may have to be cancelled too.
And veep nominee, baby Sarah, was taken out on a field trip to the United Nations so she could meet with some important people but she wasn't allowed to talk to reporters. She still hasn't held a press conference or answered any questions from reporters other than Charlie Gibson, softball Sean, and Katie Couric and she bombed all of them. Still the base loves her, and a Kenyan minister prayed over her that no witchcraft would harm her.
John McCain's campaign chairman was still raking in $15,000 a month from Freddie Mac while McCain wants to blame Obama for the entire economic meltdown.
Forty percent of the country think Sarah Palin, whom they don't really know as she is kept in seclusion, is fit to be vice president and the harder they try to cram knowledge into her head, the more crazy mixed up it comes out.
Meanwhile - two wars go on, that crazy president of Georgia is being interviewed about his country's problems, the environment continues to deteriorate, oil prices go up and Bush just gave the most coherent speech of his presidency where he tried his best to create a panic in the country.
Bush will leave office soon and we still don't know if that insane McCain might replace him.
And no one from the current administration is in jail.
I don't understand any of this.
No time out from war - putting things in perspective
From Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org on McCain's attempt to cancel Friday's debate on foreign policy:
So, because there's a financial crisis, Senator McCain cannot take 90 minutes to address how he will face challenges around the world, including how and when he will send American troops to fight, and possibly die.
Wow. Troops would sure love that luxury.
Unfortunately, though, insurgents in Iraq don't stop shooting at us, or setting IEDs, because our Commander in Chief needs a breather to figure out Wall Street.
Al Qaeda in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region don't send our troops notes that read, "Hey, I hear you guys are tied up with Wall Street. Your President needs to concentrate on other things, so we'll give you a break. So, to make things easier on you, here's our coordinates."
Nor do our troops get a few days to figure out how to hold onto an area we've secured, if there's an unexpected attack. Sometimes we need to deal with multiple flare-ups at once in any warzone. We'd sure love a time-out, but sadly, the world isn't such a nice place that it gives us that kind of pity.
When you're Commander in Chief, I don't think there'd be a worse signal to send to our troops in harm's way than to say, "Hey, hold on guys. I know you're getting killed over there, but I have to get a time-out here to deal with Wall Street."If troops need to multi-task without a break, is it so wrong that we demand that a potential President-in-waiting prove that he can manage a financial crisis, and still address crises around the world for 90 minutes?
And, if a potential President-to-be can't manage that, is it wrong to think that maybe he ought not just suspend a debate and the campaign, but move aside and get out of the race?
GOP = Greedy old plutocrats
There are many reasons I am a liberal Democrat, but by far one of the biggest is that I see the Republican Party as the party of greed. And one of the most amazing things that has happened in my lifetime is the transformation of the Republican Party's image into one that was for the people, because it preached hatred of an evil government. Of course, now we find out that the government was considered evil by these freaks because it tried to put a stop on their greed.
How easily that sunny smile and aw shucks acting job of Ronald Reagan fooled the people into thinking the Republican Party was on their side, even though it destroyed the union movement, the manufacturing sector, and along with it a great deal of the middle class. How quickly the people seemed to forget that the Democratic Party gave them Social Security and Medicare, created anti-poverty programs, and rescued them from the Depression.
Democrats have not done as good a job in recent years as they once did in protecting the people, having been cowed by the supposed rightward tilt of the country. But now the mask has been stripped away and the people are seeing the GOP as Greedy old plutocrats, and liberalism might just make a comeback.
That would be another amazing thing.
How easily that sunny smile and aw shucks acting job of Ronald Reagan fooled the people into thinking the Republican Party was on their side, even though it destroyed the union movement, the manufacturing sector, and along with it a great deal of the middle class. How quickly the people seemed to forget that the Democratic Party gave them Social Security and Medicare, created anti-poverty programs, and rescued them from the Depression.
Democrats have not done as good a job in recent years as they once did in protecting the people, having been cowed by the supposed rightward tilt of the country. But now the mask has been stripped away and the people are seeing the GOP as Greedy old plutocrats, and liberalism might just make a comeback.
That would be another amazing thing.
Elitism, education, and the presidency
According to new Washington Post poll:
This is an amazing statistic to me. Why would the Democratic candidate lead among white votes with college degrees by nine points and trail by seventeen points among white voters without college degrees?
Could it be that those with college degrees know more? Could it be that they have more information about the complexities of life, including the presidency, than their non college educated counterparts? Wouldn't it be a good idea to be informed as much as possible before one votes?
If voters are not voting on the basis of their knowledge and their education, what are they voting on? Gut instinct? Personality characteristics and personal story?
The Republican Party almost always wins the non-college educated vote, partly by painting the Democrats as elitist. If one becomes an elitist by being college educated, why do most Americans - even those without a college education - want their kids to go to college?
We are really divided on this one aren't we? We want our kids to go to college, but we don't want to vote for someone who did well in college and got an advanced degree because - well, that is elitist.
We've had eight years of a president who, while the recipient of two degrees, apparently did not learn anything. He won by portraying himself as rather uneducated and stupid - a guy to have a beer with - a guy with a brain who preferred not to use it.
Wouldn't it be nice for a change to elect someone who actually uses his brain - even if he is an "elitist?"
Two weeks ago, McCain held a substantial advantage among white voters, including newfound strength with white women. In the face of bad economic news, the two candidates now run about evenly among white women, and Obama has narrowed the overall gap among white voters to five percentage points.
Much of the movement has come among college-educated whites. Whites without college degrees favor McCain by 17 points, while those with college degrees support Obama by 9 points. No Democrat has carried white, college-educated voters in
presidential elections dating back to 1980, but they were a key part of Obama's
coalition in the primaries.
This is an amazing statistic to me. Why would the Democratic candidate lead among white votes with college degrees by nine points and trail by seventeen points among white voters without college degrees?
Could it be that those with college degrees know more? Could it be that they have more information about the complexities of life, including the presidency, than their non college educated counterparts? Wouldn't it be a good idea to be informed as much as possible before one votes?
If voters are not voting on the basis of their knowledge and their education, what are they voting on? Gut instinct? Personality characteristics and personal story?
The Republican Party almost always wins the non-college educated vote, partly by painting the Democrats as elitist. If one becomes an elitist by being college educated, why do most Americans - even those without a college education - want their kids to go to college?
We are really divided on this one aren't we? We want our kids to go to college, but we don't want to vote for someone who did well in college and got an advanced degree because - well, that is elitist.
We've had eight years of a president who, while the recipient of two degrees, apparently did not learn anything. He won by portraying himself as rather uneducated and stupid - a guy to have a beer with - a guy with a brain who preferred not to use it.
Wouldn't it be nice for a change to elect someone who actually uses his brain - even if he is an "elitist?"
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
The biggest scandals
Not being an economist or a wall street mogul, I can't understand the nuances of this Wall Street mess and the proposed 700 billion dollar bailout. But then I've heard some economists say on television that even they don't understand all the new instruments on Wall Street these days: credit default swaps and so on.
Yet our Congress is told by the president and his chief economic guys that if they don't pass this bailout, the entire economy will collapse and we will enter a second Great Depression.
There most assuredly has been scandalous behavior throughout the economic sector, from the small and large mortgage brokers who made the ill-advised loans, to the securities firms who bundled together a bunch of worthless loans and sold them as securities, to the credit default swappers who, from what I can gather, bet that the whole mess would fail and so stand to gain tons of money with the bailout, when they are paid for betting against the solvency of the system.
But as Congress tries to decide what to do, and we ordinary Americans struggle to understand and make up our own minds whether we are going to accept what Congress does or get out the pitchforks, there are two huge scandals that stand out above all the others.
The first scandal is that our economic system has been allowed to become so complex that ordinary citizens and even ordinary lawmakers cannot understand it. How on earth is someone supposed to regulate, supervise, and legislate, when one cannot even understand what is happening?
And the second scandal is that we don't even know if we can trust the president and his economic team. The Bush administration has already lied so much to us that we have no idea whether what they are telling us is true - that the system could collapse - or whether this is all an election year ploy to advantage their own party.
That it has come to this in our great nation - that things have become too complex for us to understand and thus govern ourselves, and that our president is a crook and a liar whom we cannot trust - does not bode well for our democracy.
Yet our Congress is told by the president and his chief economic guys that if they don't pass this bailout, the entire economy will collapse and we will enter a second Great Depression.
There most assuredly has been scandalous behavior throughout the economic sector, from the small and large mortgage brokers who made the ill-advised loans, to the securities firms who bundled together a bunch of worthless loans and sold them as securities, to the credit default swappers who, from what I can gather, bet that the whole mess would fail and so stand to gain tons of money with the bailout, when they are paid for betting against the solvency of the system.
But as Congress tries to decide what to do, and we ordinary Americans struggle to understand and make up our own minds whether we are going to accept what Congress does or get out the pitchforks, there are two huge scandals that stand out above all the others.
The first scandal is that our economic system has been allowed to become so complex that ordinary citizens and even ordinary lawmakers cannot understand it. How on earth is someone supposed to regulate, supervise, and legislate, when one cannot even understand what is happening?
And the second scandal is that we don't even know if we can trust the president and his economic team. The Bush administration has already lied so much to us that we have no idea whether what they are telling us is true - that the system could collapse - or whether this is all an election year ploy to advantage their own party.
That it has come to this in our great nation - that things have become too complex for us to understand and thus govern ourselves, and that our president is a crook and a liar whom we cannot trust - does not bode well for our democracy.
Baby Sarah's field trip
Congress is deliberating over how to save the country and each individual citizen from financial ruin, trying to determine just how much they can trust the Bush administration that has already cried "wolf" on at least two other occasions - in proposing the PATRIOT Act, and in seeking authorization for the Iraq War. A Marriot hotel is blown up in Pakistan and Iraq remains occupied territory with no end in sight. People are losing their homes and cars and jobs. The residents of Galveston still have no water and power. The future seems bleak for our children and grandchildren. McCain and Obama hold press conferences and prepare for the most important debate of their - and our - lives.
And what is baby Sarah doing - she who will not be interviewed?
Baby Sarah is meeting with daddy Kissinger, and the big boys at the United Nations so that in her debate with Joe Biden, she can say she has met with foreign leaders. As if the Palin nomination itself isn't a big enough joke, as if we haven't already seen how pitifully unprepared she is to be the vice presidential nominee, let alone the vice president, as if we aren't already tired of her lies, her snit-fits when she fired people who didn't bow before her, her blocking of bipartisan investigations, her holier than thou moral crap about her blessed and wonderful family, now we have to believe that this "take your daughter to work day" is a serious step in her gaining foreign policy cred?
So while the grown-ups try to save the country, baby Sarah is having a field trip.
Please, god, let this be over soon.
And what is baby Sarah doing - she who will not be interviewed?
Baby Sarah is meeting with daddy Kissinger, and the big boys at the United Nations so that in her debate with Joe Biden, she can say she has met with foreign leaders. As if the Palin nomination itself isn't a big enough joke, as if we haven't already seen how pitifully unprepared she is to be the vice presidential nominee, let alone the vice president, as if we aren't already tired of her lies, her snit-fits when she fired people who didn't bow before her, her blocking of bipartisan investigations, her holier than thou moral crap about her blessed and wonderful family, now we have to believe that this "take your daughter to work day" is a serious step in her gaining foreign policy cred?
So while the grown-ups try to save the country, baby Sarah is having a field trip.
Please, god, let this be over soon.
The stakes in this election
BooMan issued a challenge to readers to describe in one paragraph what is at stake in this election.
Here's a good one:
Here's a good one:
Over the last eight years, our response to 9/11 ended America's world political dominance, in turn the Iraq and Afghanistan wars ended our world military dominance, in turn our response to Katrina and Rita, Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib ended our world moral dominance, and in turn the Crash of 2008 ended our world financial dominance. In November we must decide between the people that squandered everything that made America great, or the people who can restore that greatness.
Alaskans are wise to their governor
Check out this diary on Daily Kos with great pictures of Alaskans demonstrating against Sarah Palin.
Scroll down past the story - the pictures of the homemade signs are priceless.
Scroll down past the story - the pictures of the homemade signs are priceless.
How to lose your mind: try talking to a Republican
I've heard a lot of people say recently that whenever they try to talk to a Republican about this election, they come away feeling crazy. Every time they bring up an issue or make a specific point, the Republican has a come-back, often having nothing to do with the issue and always defying logic.
Example: My daughter who is a stay at home mother of three young children, and has recently become interested in politics, wandered onto a pro-Sarah Palin discussion board. Since she could not understand how anyone could think Sarah Palin was qualified to be vice president, she wanted to know what these women thought. Mostly what she found was feminist-bashing, as in "feminists just can't accept that a conservative woman like Sarah Palin or Margaret Thatcher could be in positions of power." (I don't remember any feminists getting their panties in a twist about Margaret Thatcher, but that's a different issue.)
Someone liberal apparently breached their firewall and asked how being a mother of five, a mayor of a small town, and a two year governor of a sparsely populated state qualifed her to be vice president, to which an angry member of the discussion group said "How does being friends with a criminal and a terrorist qualify you to be president?"
Now this was an absolutely perfect response if you are a Republican. If the woman had really tried to answer the question, she would have had to say "It doesn't," or "It doesn't but she can learn on the job" or even the ridiculous answer often given that "she has more 'executive experience' than Obama." But these answers really don't make Sarah look too good, so the better reply is to attack Obama. But notice the woman did not attack Obama on his experience as a state legislator or four year senator or ten year Constitutional law professor. She attacked him because of his knowing and associating minimally with William Ayers, who was never convicted of anything and who now is a professor and community fund raiser, and Tony Rezko, an alleged criminal who sold the Obamas some property.
These are two completely different things, one having nothing to do with the other. It would have been easy to go back and say "How does being married to a man who is an Alaskan separatist, or firing people who disagree with you, or helping elect the indicted Ted Stevens qualify you to be vice president?" but this just gets silly. The point is that the question was about experience and because there was not good defense, the woman simply deflected the question by attacking on a completely different topic. Obama isn't running on his credentials as an associate of either Ayeres or Rezko, while Palin is running on her credentials as a mother, mayor and governor. But those who have drunk the Kool-Aid cannot see the difference.
Another example from that discussion thread. One woman said how much she admired Palin for "choosing" to have her Down syndrome baby when ninety percent of babies with Down syndrome are aborted by liberals. (I have no way of knowing if this 90% statistic is true but I do know that liberals aren't the majority of women who have abortions. Some of the highest rates are in the southern states, and some of the lowest rates in liberal states like Massachusetts.)
This reference to liberals got under my daughter's skin, so she decided to join the conversation. She said she was a liberal, spoke of her own situation as the mother of three and how she couldn't imagine having an abortion unless her life was in danger, then she talked about her friend who is pro-choice but chose not to have abortions when she found out that both of her children would have Down syndrome. Someone replied that her friend's situation didn't mean anything, and then told her the discussion board was supposed to be confined to people who like Sarah Palin and asked her to leave.
Whoa! Hoory for free speech! These guys are really into the Constitution.
My daughter's conclusion and mine are that you cannot talk to these people because they are simply irrational. Their minds are made up and they have built in tactics to protect their dogma: distract, deflect, attack, accuse, demean, defame, project, rationalize, and when all else fails - banish anyone whose argument they can't refute.
Example: My daughter who is a stay at home mother of three young children, and has recently become interested in politics, wandered onto a pro-Sarah Palin discussion board. Since she could not understand how anyone could think Sarah Palin was qualified to be vice president, she wanted to know what these women thought. Mostly what she found was feminist-bashing, as in "feminists just can't accept that a conservative woman like Sarah Palin or Margaret Thatcher could be in positions of power." (I don't remember any feminists getting their panties in a twist about Margaret Thatcher, but that's a different issue.)
Someone liberal apparently breached their firewall and asked how being a mother of five, a mayor of a small town, and a two year governor of a sparsely populated state qualifed her to be vice president, to which an angry member of the discussion group said "How does being friends with a criminal and a terrorist qualify you to be president?"
Now this was an absolutely perfect response if you are a Republican. If the woman had really tried to answer the question, she would have had to say "It doesn't," or "It doesn't but she can learn on the job" or even the ridiculous answer often given that "she has more 'executive experience' than Obama." But these answers really don't make Sarah look too good, so the better reply is to attack Obama. But notice the woman did not attack Obama on his experience as a state legislator or four year senator or ten year Constitutional law professor. She attacked him because of his knowing and associating minimally with William Ayers, who was never convicted of anything and who now is a professor and community fund raiser, and Tony Rezko, an alleged criminal who sold the Obamas some property.
These are two completely different things, one having nothing to do with the other. It would have been easy to go back and say "How does being married to a man who is an Alaskan separatist, or firing people who disagree with you, or helping elect the indicted Ted Stevens qualify you to be vice president?" but this just gets silly. The point is that the question was about experience and because there was not good defense, the woman simply deflected the question by attacking on a completely different topic. Obama isn't running on his credentials as an associate of either Ayeres or Rezko, while Palin is running on her credentials as a mother, mayor and governor. But those who have drunk the Kool-Aid cannot see the difference.
Another example from that discussion thread. One woman said how much she admired Palin for "choosing" to have her Down syndrome baby when ninety percent of babies with Down syndrome are aborted by liberals. (I have no way of knowing if this 90% statistic is true but I do know that liberals aren't the majority of women who have abortions. Some of the highest rates are in the southern states, and some of the lowest rates in liberal states like Massachusetts.)
This reference to liberals got under my daughter's skin, so she decided to join the conversation. She said she was a liberal, spoke of her own situation as the mother of three and how she couldn't imagine having an abortion unless her life was in danger, then she talked about her friend who is pro-choice but chose not to have abortions when she found out that both of her children would have Down syndrome. Someone replied that her friend's situation didn't mean anything, and then told her the discussion board was supposed to be confined to people who like Sarah Palin and asked her to leave.
Whoa! Hoory for free speech! These guys are really into the Constitution.
My daughter's conclusion and mine are that you cannot talk to these people because they are simply irrational. Their minds are made up and they have built in tactics to protect their dogma: distract, deflect, attack, accuse, demean, defame, project, rationalize, and when all else fails - banish anyone whose argument they can't refute.
Smartest politician ever?
I don't get Bill Clinton.
First he comes out yesterday on the view, spends five minutes praising Sarah Palin and saying he understands why people would like her, then says why he thinks Obama will win anyway. Not because he's intelligent, has the right temperament, it a great communicator, espouses the right policies, but because there are more registered democrats than republicans, because there are more young people voting, and because people want change.
Then he goes on David Letterman, praises McCain, says he is a great hero, gave the most anyone can give for his country other than dying, but then said Obama will win because people want change.
He just can't bring himself to praise Obama. He can't bear to give any credit to the man who defeated his wife for the title he thought she deserved. He just can't do it.
If he really is counting on Hillary becoming the nominee in 2012, in the event of an Obama loss this year, and he expects to get any African American support when he seems unable or unwilling to enthusiastically support the first African American nominee for president, and a nominee that is one of the best and brightest nominees ever, black or white, he'd better think again.
If he blows it for Obama with this tepid support, and his indirect support for McCain/Palin, Hillary will be lucky to get 5% of the African American vote when she runs again.
First he comes out yesterday on the view, spends five minutes praising Sarah Palin and saying he understands why people would like her, then says why he thinks Obama will win anyway. Not because he's intelligent, has the right temperament, it a great communicator, espouses the right policies, but because there are more registered democrats than republicans, because there are more young people voting, and because people want change.
Then he goes on David Letterman, praises McCain, says he is a great hero, gave the most anyone can give for his country other than dying, but then said Obama will win because people want change.
He just can't bring himself to praise Obama. He can't bear to give any credit to the man who defeated his wife for the title he thought she deserved. He just can't do it.
If he really is counting on Hillary becoming the nominee in 2012, in the event of an Obama loss this year, and he expects to get any African American support when he seems unable or unwilling to enthusiastically support the first African American nominee for president, and a nominee that is one of the best and brightest nominees ever, black or white, he'd better think again.
If he blows it for Obama with this tepid support, and his indirect support for McCain/Palin, Hillary will be lucky to get 5% of the African American vote when she runs again.
The eighty year rule
I find the timing of this potential financial disaster interesting.
What some are calling a potential second "Great Depression" is happening eighty years after the stock market crash of 1929, which ushered in the first "Great Depression."
Eighty years. That means anyone who was old enough to understand the consequences of that terrible time would have to be in their nineties or older today. We don't have too many ninety year olds around, and certainly very few in their hundreds. And few of those who have lived to that age are still intellectually sharp enough to be able to discuss with us what is happening.
So it seems that we learn for a while after a disaster how not to repeat it, but as the population that suffered through a disaster ages and fades from the sphere of influence, we have to learn the lesson all over again. In this case, it has taken eighty years to put us on the verge of another "Great Depression.
Perhaps we could call this the eighty year rule.
I think of other disasters that happened less than eighty years ago and could come back some day: another World War, a nuclear Cold War, fascist dictatorships in Europe, and even the Holocaust.
It doesn't bode well for us unless we start living much longer, or start doing something very differently.
What some are calling a potential second "Great Depression" is happening eighty years after the stock market crash of 1929, which ushered in the first "Great Depression."
Eighty years. That means anyone who was old enough to understand the consequences of that terrible time would have to be in their nineties or older today. We don't have too many ninety year olds around, and certainly very few in their hundreds. And few of those who have lived to that age are still intellectually sharp enough to be able to discuss with us what is happening.
So it seems that we learn for a while after a disaster how not to repeat it, but as the population that suffered through a disaster ages and fades from the sphere of influence, we have to learn the lesson all over again. In this case, it has taken eighty years to put us on the verge of another "Great Depression.
Perhaps we could call this the eighty year rule.
I think of other disasters that happened less than eighty years ago and could come back some day: another World War, a nuclear Cold War, fascist dictatorships in Europe, and even the Holocaust.
It doesn't bode well for us unless we start living much longer, or start doing something very differently.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Republicans: ignorant, clueless, or mentally deficient?
According to an ARG poll:
Half of Republicans don't see what a total failure Bush is? After ignoring the intelligence prior to 9/11, lying us into an illegal and immoral war that still has us tied down after five years, allowing people to drown in New Orleans and the the majority still displaced three years later, and now presiding over the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression because of his anti-regulation ideology?
Something is definitely wrong with these people. And John McCain and Sarah Palin are their new leaders.
Among Republicans... 48% approve of the way Bush is handling his job and 46% disapprove.
Among Democrats .... 3% approve and 95% disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job.
Among independents .....8% approve and 87% disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job as president.
Overall, 17% of Americans say that they approve of the way George W. Bush is handling the economy, 78% disapprove, and 5% are undecided.
Half of Republicans don't see what a total failure Bush is? After ignoring the intelligence prior to 9/11, lying us into an illegal and immoral war that still has us tied down after five years, allowing people to drown in New Orleans and the the majority still displaced three years later, and now presiding over the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression because of his anti-regulation ideology?
Something is definitely wrong with these people. And John McCain and Sarah Palin are their new leaders.
Paying for your rape kit
Randi Rhodes says that for the taxpayers, this bailout plan is akin to getting raped and then being told you have to pay for your rape kit (a la Sarah Palin).
Accosted in a parking lot, and talking respectfully in a lab waiting room
I was sitting with my mother at the lab, waiting for her to get her twice weekly blood test. We usually pass the time talking about superficial things, but I decided to tell her what happened to me on my way out of K-Mart, where I had done some shopping for her.
I was walking to my car when a young man came up and wanted to tell me "the good news about Jesus." I hate these self-appointed evangelists intruding on my day and taking up valuable time, even if it only means I have to tell them - in the inimitable words of Sarah Palin - "thanks but no thanks." So instead of simply saying that, I uttered my exasperation and said "Oh for pete's sake, leave me alone." The kid was astonished but remained polite and tried to get another sentence out. I wouldn't let him. I said "you take care of your soul and I'll take care of mine." He remained polite and wished me a good day but it didn't make me feel any better. I don't like people coming to my door to try to save me, and I don't like being accosted in parking lots when I am usually in a hurry because I am running a quick errand for my mother. I wonder, if Jesus was here today, would he be accosting people in parking lots and outside grocery stores? I really don't think so.
So as I was telling this to my mother, rather loudly so my mother could hear, a woman who was also waiting for a blood test came over and stood in front of me. I assumed she was going to tell me I was going to hell and she was there to set me straight. And I was ready for her. Surprisingly, she said "I overheard your conversation and I have to tell you I agree with everything you are saying. I am so tired of these "Christians" telling me they have all the answers and I am in danger of going to hell." Then she said it finally occurred to her why this bothers her so much. "It's a type of bigotry," she said. "These people think they are better than I am, superior to me because of some dogma they believe in." We continued talking for a while and then it was time to leave. I didn't have time to tell her about something I read yesterday in Douglas Kmiec's book about why, as a prolife Catholic, he supports Barack Obama. The story would have warmed her heart, especially as she told me she was an Obama supporter.
Here's the passage from the book:
Obama's mother died several years ago.
What a loving, kind, brilliant man, a Christian in the truest sense of the word.
And this story only reinforces how I feel about religion - that we all find our own way, as best we can, with the training we get as children, combined with the doubts and the seeking we do as adults. As I told the woman in the lab, my mind is too small and limited to grasp what may lie beyond this life. I am humbled by my inability to know. But the only kind of God I can believe in is a kind and loving God, not a judgmental, dogmatic God, not a God that believes in going to war against Muslims, or lying in political campaigns or from the White House, or stealing the people's money, or even accosting people in parking lots with the certainty that he knows more than you do. The only kind of God I can believe in is one whom I can trust to see into my heart and know that I am doing the best I can, always trying to reach out to those in need, and always trying to live a good life. If that isn't good enough - if I have to believe in ten specific dogmas, or nine absolutes, or twelve specific commands, then how am I to know which is the right set?
I'd rather live the way I'm living, doing the best I can in this life, and trusting God, if there is a God, to take care of the next.
I was walking to my car when a young man came up and wanted to tell me "the good news about Jesus." I hate these self-appointed evangelists intruding on my day and taking up valuable time, even if it only means I have to tell them - in the inimitable words of Sarah Palin - "thanks but no thanks." So instead of simply saying that, I uttered my exasperation and said "Oh for pete's sake, leave me alone." The kid was astonished but remained polite and tried to get another sentence out. I wouldn't let him. I said "you take care of your soul and I'll take care of mine." He remained polite and wished me a good day but it didn't make me feel any better. I don't like people coming to my door to try to save me, and I don't like being accosted in parking lots when I am usually in a hurry because I am running a quick errand for my mother. I wonder, if Jesus was here today, would he be accosting people in parking lots and outside grocery stores? I really don't think so.
So as I was telling this to my mother, rather loudly so my mother could hear, a woman who was also waiting for a blood test came over and stood in front of me. I assumed she was going to tell me I was going to hell and she was there to set me straight. And I was ready for her. Surprisingly, she said "I overheard your conversation and I have to tell you I agree with everything you are saying. I am so tired of these "Christians" telling me they have all the answers and I am in danger of going to hell." Then she said it finally occurred to her why this bothers her so much. "It's a type of bigotry," she said. "These people think they are better than I am, superior to me because of some dogma they believe in." We continued talking for a while and then it was time to leave. I didn't have time to tell her about something I read yesterday in Douglas Kmiec's book about why, as a prolife Catholic, he supports Barack Obama. The story would have warmed her heart, especially as she told me she was an Obama supporter.
Here's the passage from the book:
When the Senator met with me and about thirty other religious leaders, he was asked by the eminent Dr. Franklin Graham whether he believed that "Jesus was the way, the truth and the light." Senator Obama paused and looked Reverend Graham in the eye. "Jesus is my way," said Barack. "No," said Reverend Graham, "do you accept Jesus in this way?" Again, a very thoughtful pause. And then Senator Obama said: "You know, Reverend, the most Christ-like person, the person with the most generous heart I've ever encountered in my life, was my mother. She did not have the benefit of baptism and I cannot believe in a Christianity that would exclude her from eternity. Jesus is my way, and I believe completely that I will see my mother again."
Obama's mother died several years ago.
What a loving, kind, brilliant man, a Christian in the truest sense of the word.
And this story only reinforces how I feel about religion - that we all find our own way, as best we can, with the training we get as children, combined with the doubts and the seeking we do as adults. As I told the woman in the lab, my mind is too small and limited to grasp what may lie beyond this life. I am humbled by my inability to know. But the only kind of God I can believe in is a kind and loving God, not a judgmental, dogmatic God, not a God that believes in going to war against Muslims, or lying in political campaigns or from the White House, or stealing the people's money, or even accosting people in parking lots with the certainty that he knows more than you do. The only kind of God I can believe in is one whom I can trust to see into my heart and know that I am doing the best I can, always trying to reach out to those in need, and always trying to live a good life. If that isn't good enough - if I have to believe in ten specific dogmas, or nine absolutes, or twelve specific commands, then how am I to know which is the right set?
I'd rather live the way I'm living, doing the best I can in this life, and trusting God, if there is a God, to take care of the next.
Time for the pitchforks and torches
I can't remember when I've been this scared for my country - yes I can, the Cuban Missile Crisis.
I was terrified, as were so many Americans, that we really would get into a nuclear war with the Soviets. I was fourteen at the time, and my dad reassured me. His words were the only thing that allowed me to sleep at night.
Now, forty five years later, my dad cannot speak because of a degenerative disease, and he probably doesn't understand what is happening anyway. And even his words couldn't reassure me now.
Is the country's financial system really on the verge of collapse and is Congress going to roll over and give nearly 1 trillion dollars of taxpayer money to Henry Paulson to do as he sees fit?
Is this some kind of nightmare?
These same people who lied us into war, ignored the intelligence that warned of 9/11, allowed poor black people to drown in New Orleans, and who have fucked up nearly everything they got their stinking little hands on are now going to be given all of our money and then some? And all because they were allowed to wreak their ignorant and disastrous deregulation, trickle down bullshit on us?
I think it's time for the pitchforks and the torches. I don't think we have any other choice.
I was terrified, as were so many Americans, that we really would get into a nuclear war with the Soviets. I was fourteen at the time, and my dad reassured me. His words were the only thing that allowed me to sleep at night.
Now, forty five years later, my dad cannot speak because of a degenerative disease, and he probably doesn't understand what is happening anyway. And even his words couldn't reassure me now.
Is the country's financial system really on the verge of collapse and is Congress going to roll over and give nearly 1 trillion dollars of taxpayer money to Henry Paulson to do as he sees fit?
Is this some kind of nightmare?
These same people who lied us into war, ignored the intelligence that warned of 9/11, allowed poor black people to drown in New Orleans, and who have fucked up nearly everything they got their stinking little hands on are now going to be given all of our money and then some? And all because they were allowed to wreak their ignorant and disastrous deregulation, trickle down bullshit on us?
I think it's time for the pitchforks and the torches. I don't think we have any other choice.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
President Obama meeting with the best and brightest
While McInsane was threatening to fire the chairman of the SEC, and blaiming Obama for the Wall Street Meltdown which is actually the result of 28 years of Republican economic policies, Obama maintained his cool, calm and presidential temperament and met with the best and the brightest.
Who to vote for on November 4th should be a no-brainer.
Ending the failed economic policies of the past 8 (actually 28) years
From Senator Obama's Statement of Principles for the Treasury Proposal:
The bottom line is that we must change the economic policies that led us down this dangerous path in the first place. For the last eight years, we’ve had an “on your own-anything goes” philosophy in Washington and on Wall Street that lavished tax cuts on the wealthy and big corporations; that viewed even common-sense regulation and oversight as unwise and unnecessary; and that shredded consumer protections and loosened the rules of the road. Ordinary Americans are now paying the price. The events of this week have rendered a final verdict on that failed philosophy, and it is a philosophy I will end as President of the United States.
McCain voters explained
Just heard George Will question McCain's judgment and behavior on ABC, and Sam Donaldson say the American people must begin looking at his age as a very real factor in whether or not he should be president.
Honestly, for the life of me I can't understand why anyone with any integrity - ANYONE - would vote for McCain, and adding that dimwit but incredibly devious Palin to the ticket sure didn't bring anything valuable to their case. (There are people with no integrity who will vote for McCain - the Republican ideologues and Wall Street types who game the system under Republican rule, but the reason they are voting for McCain needs no explanation.)
So I'm playing a little mental game with myself, using my Ph.D. in psychology and my analytic skills regarding human behavior to try to understand why, indeed, any non-elite ordinary American would ever vote for this insane ticket, with a man showing clear signs of dementia and erratic behavior, and a woman who knows absolutely nothing about American governance and policies other than what she can recite like a parrot, trained in talking point sessions with McCain stooges.
Here's the top five reasons why I think an average American voter might choose McCain.
1. Blind loyalty to the Republican party and seeing elections as nothing more than games between two teams. Some people see the parties as akin to sports teams in which you root for your team no matter how bad the pitcher or the quarterback, and you hate the other team, no matter how brilliant the players. Of course, when you remain loyal to your team, you have nothing to lose but your hope for the season, or the occasional bet with friends, but when you see the election as nothing more than a team sport, you could actually lose your entire country. For some reason, this doesn't enter some feeble minds, which leads me to the second reason.
2. Stupidity and brainwashing. People who fall for advertisements that lie, or carefully crafted sound bites that mislead have been conditioned for decades by their passive couch potato acceptance of the "truthfulness" of television advertising. People who are not interested in history and past events which can be instructive, or who don't see how they are being manipulated with political ideology, or religious dogma that seeks to fool them. People who get all the political education they are interested in from Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity who lie, distort and present only one side of any story. Conservatives have been brainwashing people for decades, ever since the sainted Ronny Reagan came on the scene to provide cover for their anti-people policies, appealing to hate and jealousy, and it still works with some, regardless of how awful the Republican candidate is.
3. Racism. A lot of people this year will not vote for Obama because he is black (he's also white, but in this country one drop of "black blood" means one is black and most people can't accept the probability that all of us have mixed racial backgrounds.) Racism still is strong among some people who have the need to look down on others, and the Republicans have made a number of dog whistle type ads that exploit this. The viral emails falsely accusing Obama of being "Muslim" are simply thinly disguised racist attacks. While it is no longer politically correct to hate blacks, it is perfectly acceptable to hate Muslims, many of whom are also dark-skinned. Isn't that an interesting coincidence?
4. Religion and abortion. I am amazed anew during each presidential election cycle at how religion inserts its ugly head into our politics. You may be offended by my use of the word "ugly," but like our Founding Fathers, I see how dangerous it is to insert religion into our elections. Pastors who are supposed to stay out of politics to retain their tax exemption, routinely tell people they must vote for the Republican for a variety of reasons, but two stand out the most: abortion and homosexuality. (Israel and ushering in the rapture are up there as well.) Evangelical Christians, especially of the radical fundamentalist, pentecostal, dispensalionalist rapture-ready variety have made a pact with the devil: the Republican Party. Why have they done this? Who knows the real reasons - it may have to do with money or power, but the ostensible reason is that Republican candidates keep pledging to overturn Roe V. Wade and ban gay marriage, which of course they never do and they never will. Republican economic policies are unpopular with a majority of the people and we now see the fruit of those policies: tax cuts for the rich and for oil companies and companies that ship jobs overseas, and massive deregulation of almost every industry has led to: stock market tanking, jobs shipped overseas; banking industry ruined; destruction of the middle class; and the nation's economy on the verge of a major collapse. So if we looked at the economic policies alone, no one but some elites who have made out like bandits in this mess would ever vote for the Republican. Enter Pastor Phil, or Father Bill, or Pope Benedict, or Bishop whatshisname who say: you must vote Republican because only Republicans will stop abortion and put gays back in the closet. Oh please! If Republicans ever did these things they would lose their base because then people would look at other issues. So while a few conservative Republicans like Douglas Kmiec, who has written on why Obama is a better choice for those who oppose abortion, might have woken up to the sham, most people are still taking the bait. Oh, and by the way, the number of abortions goes down in Democratic administrations and up in Republican ones. Why? Because Republicans focus only on a legal stategy to overturn Roe (which won't actually stop any abortions) while Democrats get busy addressing the reasons women resort to abortions: lack of birth control, lack of knowledge about sex, and most of all poverty.
5. War and the POW card. How many times have we heard in this election about John McCain and his courage as a POW? This appeals to the pro-war crowd, especially those who are still fighting the Vietnam War, and are most enthusiastically behind the Iraq War. You see, these men think we have to "win" in Iraq because they believe we "surrendered" in Vietnam. They don't see the immorality of both wars, because all American Wars are sacred to them. They are the same ones who condemned John Kerry who showed bravery in Vietnam, and who voted for Bush, even though he went AWOL at home. Kerry ultimately opposed the war, while Bush never did, and that is what mattered to people who feel questionning one's governement is somehow unpatriotic, regardless of the first amendment. These people are single minded in their America right or wrong mentality, and they support McCain as a warrior who agrees with them. To some people, notably those who cannot see the Iraq War for the immoral war that it is, a war that people supported on the basis of lies from their government, John McCain's unflinching support for the war is admirable, as admirable as admirable as his courage as a POW. They are still caught up in the trauma of a war from the sixties, a war that the American people ultimately rejected, and they must find a way to redeem themselves and absolve themselves of the violence they engaged in during that horrible war. McCain is their champion, representing something heroic about Vietnam, and no matter how old or out of touch, how senile or simplistic he is, they are behind him, the country be damned.
I know this isn't a charitable interpretation of the American people who support McCain. I know how unfair it must seem, but this is a crucial election, and people need to wake up. They need to see that the reasons they are voting for this man and his completely unqualified, but darling of the radical religious right, sidekick, are irrational. I don't expect them to see the light and change. I can only hope that there are enough educated, thoughtful, cautious, and mentally stable people in this country to outnumer the team players, stupid and racist voters, religious radicals and old men lost in the era of Vietnam, and reject him and his party - for the good of the nation we all love.
Honestly, for the life of me I can't understand why anyone with any integrity - ANYONE - would vote for McCain, and adding that dimwit but incredibly devious Palin to the ticket sure didn't bring anything valuable to their case. (There are people with no integrity who will vote for McCain - the Republican ideologues and Wall Street types who game the system under Republican rule, but the reason they are voting for McCain needs no explanation.)
So I'm playing a little mental game with myself, using my Ph.D. in psychology and my analytic skills regarding human behavior to try to understand why, indeed, any non-elite ordinary American would ever vote for this insane ticket, with a man showing clear signs of dementia and erratic behavior, and a woman who knows absolutely nothing about American governance and policies other than what she can recite like a parrot, trained in talking point sessions with McCain stooges.
Here's the top five reasons why I think an average American voter might choose McCain.
1. Blind loyalty to the Republican party and seeing elections as nothing more than games between two teams. Some people see the parties as akin to sports teams in which you root for your team no matter how bad the pitcher or the quarterback, and you hate the other team, no matter how brilliant the players. Of course, when you remain loyal to your team, you have nothing to lose but your hope for the season, or the occasional bet with friends, but when you see the election as nothing more than a team sport, you could actually lose your entire country. For some reason, this doesn't enter some feeble minds, which leads me to the second reason.
2. Stupidity and brainwashing. People who fall for advertisements that lie, or carefully crafted sound bites that mislead have been conditioned for decades by their passive couch potato acceptance of the "truthfulness" of television advertising. People who are not interested in history and past events which can be instructive, or who don't see how they are being manipulated with political ideology, or religious dogma that seeks to fool them. People who get all the political education they are interested in from Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity who lie, distort and present only one side of any story. Conservatives have been brainwashing people for decades, ever since the sainted Ronny Reagan came on the scene to provide cover for their anti-people policies, appealing to hate and jealousy, and it still works with some, regardless of how awful the Republican candidate is.
3. Racism. A lot of people this year will not vote for Obama because he is black (he's also white, but in this country one drop of "black blood" means one is black and most people can't accept the probability that all of us have mixed racial backgrounds.) Racism still is strong among some people who have the need to look down on others, and the Republicans have made a number of dog whistle type ads that exploit this. The viral emails falsely accusing Obama of being "Muslim" are simply thinly disguised racist attacks. While it is no longer politically correct to hate blacks, it is perfectly acceptable to hate Muslims, many of whom are also dark-skinned. Isn't that an interesting coincidence?
4. Religion and abortion. I am amazed anew during each presidential election cycle at how religion inserts its ugly head into our politics. You may be offended by my use of the word "ugly," but like our Founding Fathers, I see how dangerous it is to insert religion into our elections. Pastors who are supposed to stay out of politics to retain their tax exemption, routinely tell people they must vote for the Republican for a variety of reasons, but two stand out the most: abortion and homosexuality. (Israel and ushering in the rapture are up there as well.) Evangelical Christians, especially of the radical fundamentalist, pentecostal, dispensalionalist rapture-ready variety have made a pact with the devil: the Republican Party. Why have they done this? Who knows the real reasons - it may have to do with money or power, but the ostensible reason is that Republican candidates keep pledging to overturn Roe V. Wade and ban gay marriage, which of course they never do and they never will. Republican economic policies are unpopular with a majority of the people and we now see the fruit of those policies: tax cuts for the rich and for oil companies and companies that ship jobs overseas, and massive deregulation of almost every industry has led to: stock market tanking, jobs shipped overseas; banking industry ruined; destruction of the middle class; and the nation's economy on the verge of a major collapse. So if we looked at the economic policies alone, no one but some elites who have made out like bandits in this mess would ever vote for the Republican. Enter Pastor Phil, or Father Bill, or Pope Benedict, or Bishop whatshisname who say: you must vote Republican because only Republicans will stop abortion and put gays back in the closet. Oh please! If Republicans ever did these things they would lose their base because then people would look at other issues. So while a few conservative Republicans like Douglas Kmiec, who has written on why Obama is a better choice for those who oppose abortion, might have woken up to the sham, most people are still taking the bait. Oh, and by the way, the number of abortions goes down in Democratic administrations and up in Republican ones. Why? Because Republicans focus only on a legal stategy to overturn Roe (which won't actually stop any abortions) while Democrats get busy addressing the reasons women resort to abortions: lack of birth control, lack of knowledge about sex, and most of all poverty.
5. War and the POW card. How many times have we heard in this election about John McCain and his courage as a POW? This appeals to the pro-war crowd, especially those who are still fighting the Vietnam War, and are most enthusiastically behind the Iraq War. You see, these men think we have to "win" in Iraq because they believe we "surrendered" in Vietnam. They don't see the immorality of both wars, because all American Wars are sacred to them. They are the same ones who condemned John Kerry who showed bravery in Vietnam, and who voted for Bush, even though he went AWOL at home. Kerry ultimately opposed the war, while Bush never did, and that is what mattered to people who feel questionning one's governement is somehow unpatriotic, regardless of the first amendment. These people are single minded in their America right or wrong mentality, and they support McCain as a warrior who agrees with them. To some people, notably those who cannot see the Iraq War for the immoral war that it is, a war that people supported on the basis of lies from their government, John McCain's unflinching support for the war is admirable, as admirable as admirable as his courage as a POW. They are still caught up in the trauma of a war from the sixties, a war that the American people ultimately rejected, and they must find a way to redeem themselves and absolve themselves of the violence they engaged in during that horrible war. McCain is their champion, representing something heroic about Vietnam, and no matter how old or out of touch, how senile or simplistic he is, they are behind him, the country be damned.
I know this isn't a charitable interpretation of the American people who support McCain. I know how unfair it must seem, but this is a crucial election, and people need to wake up. They need to see that the reasons they are voting for this man and his completely unqualified, but darling of the radical religious right, sidekick, are irrational. I don't expect them to see the light and change. I can only hope that there are enough educated, thoughtful, cautious, and mentally stable people in this country to outnumer the team players, stupid and racist voters, religious radicals and old men lost in the era of Vietnam, and reject him and his party - for the good of the nation we all love.
Quote for the day
Wisdom can be found throughout the ages, but how often we ignore it! This from Albert Camus, writing to a German friend, who supported Hitler.
You said to me "The greatness of one's country is beyond price. Everything is good that contributes to its greatness, and in a world where everything has lost its meaning, those lucky few, who, like us young Germans, are fortunate enough to find a meaning in the destiny of our country, must sacrifice everything else to it." I loved you then, but at this point we diverged. "No," I told you, "Everything must not be subordinated to a single end. There are means which cannot be excused, and I should like to be able to love my country, and still love justice."
You retorted "Well you don't love your country."That was five years ago. We have been separated since then. And I can tell you that not a single day has passed during those long years without my remembering your remark "You don't love your country."
No, I didn't love my country, if pointing out what is unjust about what one loves amounts to not loving. No, I didn't love my country, if insisting that what one loves measure up to the finest image you have of her amounts to not loving, then I do not love my country.That was five years ago, and many men in France thought as I did. Some of them have already been stood up against the wall facing the twelve little black eyes of German "destiny", and those men, who in your opinion, did not love their country, did more for it than you can ever do, for their heroism was that they had first to conquer themselves.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
This woman is a joke
Poor widdle baby sarah - she can't answer long questions in a debate because she isn't very smart and that mean old joey biden might beat her up or something and besides no one wants the debate to go on past her bedtime.
I think the media should have done two things. When the McCain campaign said she wasn't giving interviews they should have stopped covering her - period. No campaign appearances covered, no travel, no nothing except National Enquirer type scandal fodder. And when the campaign said she couldn't play in the big leagues and debate like a big girl, they should have said tough, the rules are the rules. Why is everyone giving in to this joke of a candidate, whose maturity level is that of a bratty but popular junior high school girl, and her IQ doesn't even get to triple digits?
Read the last sentence of the report below. They were afraid she would be at a disadvantage and on the defensive. No, they want her prepared with memorized sound bites and this allows her to be a cyborg debator. Or maybe she'll hide an earpiece behind her hair and she'll be hooked up to someone who will feed her the answers - like Bush was four years ago.
The Obama and McCain campaigns have agreed to an unusual free-flowing format for the three televised presidential debates, which begin on Friday, but the McCain camp fought for and won a much more structured approach for the questioning at the vice-presidential debate, advisers to both campaigns said Saturday.
At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican
nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator
Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.
Pearls of wisdom from Caribou Barbie
Do the people listening to her understand her or is she just a prop and it doesn't matter what comes out of her mouth? She makes Bush look like a great orator.
Introducing John McCain yesterday - see if it makes any more sense to you than it does to me:
Introducing John McCain yesterday - see if it makes any more sense to you than it does to me:
Times are tough right now across our country. And Americans are facing kind of a elements of a perfect storm that we've got to make sure don't all come together at this time. High taxes - that's one of the elements that can result in a perfect storm that will not be good for the future of America. High gas prices. Dependence on energy sources from foreign sources. Foreign sources that don't necessarily like America - they certainly don't have our best interests at heart.
We've got too little courage in Washington. That's another one of these elements if all put together at the same time will not be good for America. And then too much greed on Wall Street. Excess on Wall Street. And kind of that status quo politics as usual acceptance of what's been going on Wall Street.
It was John McCain two years ago. He started warning everybody. Fannie and Freddie have got to be shored up, there have got to be changes in those organizations or you are going to see what exactly is happening today. He warned - he had that foresight. He's got some great foresight on a whole lot of other fronts also - the war in Iraq and so many other things affecting America and our future.
John McCain's campaign made simple
I'm a POW.
I'm a maverick.
The press is my base. I love the press.
The surge worked.
I was for the war and the surge.
I love Bush.
Voted with him 90% of the time.
Obama was against the war and the surge.
Bush and I were right, Obama was wrong.
I'm a warrior.
Drill here, drill now.
He's inexperienced.
He's a fancy talker.
That's not change you can believe in.
I'll change Washington, even though I haven't in 26 years.
He's a celebrity.
He's an elitist.
He's not like you; he's black.
Obama's playing the race card.
Drill, baby, drill.
Country first.
We need a health care plan that deregulates insurance companies.
I've always been a deregulator.
Free market! Free market!
I have lots of houses now, but once upon a time I had no house, so shut up.
Bush who?
Heeeeere's Sarah!
She can see Russia from her house.
She's a pit bull with lipstick.
She's a maverick.
Isn't she pretty!
Look at all the crowds we're getting.
Sarah's going back to Alaska.
What happened to the crowds?
Did you forget I was a POW?
McCain first!
Sarah won't meet the press. The press is sexist.
The fundamentals of the economy are strong.
I'm a deregulator.
It's time to regulate.
I've always been a regulator - in my heart.
I'll fire the SEC chairman. He didn't regulate enough.
I'll fire the FEC chairman. Did I say FEC? I meant SEC.
I'll clean up Washington.
I'll clean up Wall Street.
This mess is all Obama's fault - blame him and that other black guy from Fannie Mae.
Don't blame me.
I'm a POW.
I can't be blamed for anything.
Hey, look at Sarah.
I hate the press.
I'm a maverick.
The press is my base. I love the press.
The surge worked.
I was for the war and the surge.
I love Bush.
Voted with him 90% of the time.
Obama was against the war and the surge.
Bush and I were right, Obama was wrong.
I'm a warrior.
Drill here, drill now.
He's inexperienced.
He's a fancy talker.
That's not change you can believe in.
I'll change Washington, even though I haven't in 26 years.
He's a celebrity.
He's an elitist.
He's not like you; he's black.
Obama's playing the race card.
Drill, baby, drill.
Country first.
We need a health care plan that deregulates insurance companies.
I've always been a deregulator.
Free market! Free market!
I have lots of houses now, but once upon a time I had no house, so shut up.
Bush who?
Heeeeere's Sarah!
She can see Russia from her house.
She's a pit bull with lipstick.
She's a maverick.
Isn't she pretty!
Look at all the crowds we're getting.
Sarah's going back to Alaska.
What happened to the crowds?
Did you forget I was a POW?
McCain first!
Sarah won't meet the press. The press is sexist.
The fundamentals of the economy are strong.
I'm a deregulator.
It's time to regulate.
I've always been a regulator - in my heart.
I'll fire the SEC chairman. He didn't regulate enough.
I'll fire the FEC chairman. Did I say FEC? I meant SEC.
I'll clean up Washington.
I'll clean up Wall Street.
This mess is all Obama's fault - blame him and that other black guy from Fannie Mae.
Don't blame me.
I'm a POW.
I can't be blamed for anything.
Hey, look at Sarah.
I hate the press.
Just shut up!
One good thing about the $1 trillion federal bailout on Wall Street is that NEVER AGAIN should conservatives and republicans be able to accuse liberals and democrats of being socialists.
Of course, liberals and democrats have never been socialists, but that didn't stop the radio blowhards from attacking them with that label and it probably won't even now as conservative republicans live in fantasy land.
Well now that conservative republicans have achieved a level of real socialism (government ownership of the means of production) with their takeover of our financial institutions, which today are the biggest segment of our economy, it is conservative republicans who have brought about the socialist revolution that the radio blowhards have been warning about.
So the next person that tries to say I am a socialist is going to get a big comeback from me: STFU.
Of course, liberals and democrats have never been socialists, but that didn't stop the radio blowhards from attacking them with that label and it probably won't even now as conservative republicans live in fantasy land.
Well now that conservative republicans have achieved a level of real socialism (government ownership of the means of production) with their takeover of our financial institutions, which today are the biggest segment of our economy, it is conservative republicans who have brought about the socialist revolution that the radio blowhards have been warning about.
So the next person that tries to say I am a socialist is going to get a big comeback from me: STFU.
Quote of the day
Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.
John McCain, 2007
A letter to the troops
The "noise" of Christians and Christian preaching these days usually makes me want to run the other way. It has been a long time since I have had any respect for the loudest preachers out there who have become cheerleaders for the Iraq War, heaped praise on George W. Bush, demanded that we obey the laws of their churches and want to make America a "Christian nation."
But every once in a while something catches my eye that gets me to take notice, something written or spoken not by these false Christians who have distorted the gospels and who have banned together in megachurches to give some meaning to their otherwise pitiful lives, but by a real follower of Christ, someone who realizes just how radical the message of Jesus is.
This is from an open letter to the troops, written by a recent convert to the Christian faith. The long article is well worth reading, but here's a sample:
But every once in a while something catches my eye that gets me to take notice, something written or spoken not by these false Christians who have distorted the gospels and who have banned together in megachurches to give some meaning to their otherwise pitiful lives, but by a real follower of Christ, someone who realizes just how radical the message of Jesus is.
This is from an open letter to the troops, written by a recent convert to the Christian faith. The long article is well worth reading, but here's a sample:
The Enemy is the raison d'etre of the armed forces. And so other nations - nations of people who have already suffered terribly - were selected to become The Enemy in order to justify the plundering of their resources and the subsidized economies of war - from no-bid contracts for hi-tech weapons to contractors who pay exorbitant salaries and charge outrageous prices to wash your clothes, feed you, and run facilities that insulate you from the harsh and incessant realities of the nations you now occupy. Do you really think that were it not for oil, you would even be in that
region? Do you know how many campaign contributions are funneled to politicians of both parties by "defense" contractors? Enemies make money. Enemies are good business. The business of war is good these days. The structures of evil and the evil of structures are visible to anyone who consents to see. Consenting to see constitutes an entry through the passageway of Grace.
Friday, September 19, 2008
True believers
While standing in line at the local Baskin-Robbins, waiting to drown my sorrows in a hot fudge sundae, I overheard some eighth graders from the local Christian school talking about their Bible teacher who is "so lame" because she doesn't believe in the Loch Ness monster and aliens.
Anybody else think this is as funny as I do?
Can we use our brains for just a minute - those of us who have one?
The McCain campaign has done everything imaginable to get you to disengage your brain in this election. Actually, the Republicans do it every four years, but this time they upped the ante by nominating a total ignoramus as vice president (they did it once before with Quayle and I thought nobody could top him but at least he didn't say he was a foreign policy expert because you could see Canada from Indiana.).
I find myself completely gobsmacked by the enthusiasm for this empty-headed woman. Are we going to have to start telling dumb brunette jokes? Because she is a joke. She knows nothing about anything and we are supposed to think she's an appropriate candidate because she gave birth to a Down syndrome baby and has a pregnant, unmarried teenage daughter? Really? I mean really?
Here's two of her recent statements:
On earmarks:
On oil:
Huh? Neither of these statements makes any sense, even if you try really hard to figure them out. The woman is an empty vessel who uses fifty words to say something she could say, if she knew what she was talking about, in five. She reminds me of the saying "Shallow brooks are noisy."
I think Sarah Palin does not even realize what deep shit this country is in right now because of her party. She doesn't realize that we have spent nearly $1 trillion ($1,000,000,000,000) in Iraq and will spend the same on this bailout of the investment banks and AIG. She thinks she's running for Class president and she can make faces at and sling smears at her opponent just for the fun of it. The woman is not serious. There aren't enough descriptive words to explain how stupid she is.
John McCain, you should be defeated because you have insulted the intelligence of half of the American people. (The other half are not intelligent enough to be insulted.) But even if only half of the people are insulted, you should still be defeated, because those of us who have a brain do not deserve to be governed by two of the dumbest people on the planet.
I find myself completely gobsmacked by the enthusiasm for this empty-headed woman. Are we going to have to start telling dumb brunette jokes? Because she is a joke. She knows nothing about anything and we are supposed to think she's an appropriate candidate because she gave birth to a Down syndrome baby and has a pregnant, unmarried teenage daughter? Really? I mean really?
Here's two of her recent statements:
On earmarks:
If its something that Alaskans really want and support, which at this point they are not willing to support to such an extent that we'll pay for it ourselves, we better kill the project 'cause we know that the rest of the nation isn't going to pay for it.
On oil:
Of course, it’s a fungible commodity and they don’t flag, you know, the molecules, where it’s going and where it’s not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first... So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it’s Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It’s got to flow into our domestic markets first.
Huh? Neither of these statements makes any sense, even if you try really hard to figure them out. The woman is an empty vessel who uses fifty words to say something she could say, if she knew what she was talking about, in five. She reminds me of the saying "Shallow brooks are noisy."
I think Sarah Palin does not even realize what deep shit this country is in right now because of her party. She doesn't realize that we have spent nearly $1 trillion ($1,000,000,000,000) in Iraq and will spend the same on this bailout of the investment banks and AIG. She thinks she's running for Class president and she can make faces at and sling smears at her opponent just for the fun of it. The woman is not serious. There aren't enough descriptive words to explain how stupid she is.
John McCain, you should be defeated because you have insulted the intelligence of half of the American people. (The other half are not intelligent enough to be insulted.) But even if only half of the people are insulted, you should still be defeated, because those of us who have a brain do not deserve to be governed by two of the dumbest people on the planet.
Picture of the day
Today, in support of and hope for the end of the Reagan-Bush-Gingrich-McCain-Dobson-Palin nonsense that has infected this country, I offer a picture of hope, rather than my usual picture of the day mocking McCain Palin. Enjoy.
Words of a former Republican
From John Cole, who blogs on Balloon Juice. Cole is a former Republican who switched parties because of his utter disallusionment with the Republicans. He's a sober and reasoned Obama supporter.
Every day the travesty of GOP rule becomes more and more obvious. I still believe many of the same things I have always believed, whether it be about abortion, the death penalty, the use of the military, etc., but it just becomes increasingly clear with every day how bankrupt the conservative movement has become. I don’t think the Democrats are that much better, and have repeatedly stated that I came to the party pre-disillusioned, but they are, at least right now, better. That can not be argued. What galls me is the depths that some folks seem willing to sink to in order to keep power for the broken and corrupt “conservative” ideology. It seems to me that simply comparing where we are now as opposed to where we were at the end of the Clinton years really says it all. The GOP has failed, and they richly deserve a few years off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)