God bless South Carolina! Barack Obama's big win there was so incredibly gratifying. The Clintons' antics leading up to the vote were so divisive and cynical. It was so disheartening for me as a Democrat--so destructive to the party. But, Barack took it by such an enormous margin--more than Clinton and Edwards combined, that it was a clear signal that the Democrats are not having it this time around. We want to believe. And now Caroline Kennedy has come out and endorsed him as being the first candidate to inspire so much hope for the future of this country, especially in the younger generations, since her own father! Hope lives!
It seems that the Clinton campaign strategy was to wheel Bill out and let him play the heavy, sow the seeds of negativity and distrust, while letting Hillary rise above the fray. Why, she has looked positively giddy through this last week--smiling more broadly the uglier things got around her. They tried to make Barack into the "black" candidate instead of a candidate who was black. It was as though he wanted to scare whites and discourage the new voters coming into this thing full of optimism to stay home. Looking forward to Super Tuesday and big states like California, there were cynical under currents to exploit black-hispanic tensions, too. (My hope is he will emphasize his father's immigrant history to quell any fears there that may have unfairly been raised.) Hillary pulled out the "slumlord" charge at the debate. And Barack got mad--rightfully so. It won't stick to Barack, because no one thinks he has the kind of character to enter into something so unethical, much less criminal --in contrast to the Clintons. Anyone who has been in politics in any level for any length of time is going to rub shoulders with unsavory people who are out for themselves. But no one is buying that Obama is "pro-slumlord". The only thing that the Clintons managed to do was to strengthen his backbone for the general. For that, and that only--I say thanks. For the sake of the Democratic Party, I hope Hillary can keep Bill on a shorter leash. One Clinton is enough.
Back in 1991, when Bill Clinton was way down in the democratic polls, I read a full-page table in the Washington Post that outlined the positions of all the Democratic hopefuls. I remember thinking. I agree most with this guy Bill Clinton, but who the hell is he? Governor of Arkansas? Eventually, in 1992, I voted for him in both the primary and by absentee ballot from Sao Paulo, Brazil in the general election. I have a picture of myself in a Clinton-Gore t-shirt on the balcony of my apartment, with the enormity of South America's largest city spread out behind me. I was so proud.
Fast forward through White Water, Trave lgate, File gate.... File gate was the one that did me in. If the Republicans put up someone not too horrible, I would hold my nose and vote their way. Dole. Not the most conservative ever. Old as dirt--likely to last in that office for only one term, I thought. I held my nose and pulled the lever for a Republican. I almost vomited, but I did it. I know there were people in the Gingrich gang who were digging like crazy. I didn't know what was what, but something smelled real bad in the White House. As a Democrat, I thought...something is going to blow up if there is a second term. Give Dole four years and then let's work like hell to capture the flag again.
Did I think "blow up" meant a blow job. Uh--no. I didn't see that coming. I mean--was this a bad political satire? When Bill Clinton wagged his finger in my face after the Super Bowl and said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", I believed him. And I was ready to defend him. I was pissed. I couldn't believe I had voted for a Republican.
When the truth came out, though, I wanted him to resign. Some of my Democratic friends could not believe it. Some of my Republican friends could not believe it. But my reasoning was this-- 1. It was a horrible distraction for this country. 2. What kind of judgment or self control did this guy have? He knew the Republicans were looking for anything on him, so how could he have been so reckless? 3. Gore was perfectly capable of finishing out the term and would be in better place to be elected under the shadow of his own leadership then from under the shadow of Monica's blue dress.
Then the idiot Republicans over-reached and went through the whole impeachment exercise and I had to say they were back to being the more destructive force in Washington. No one would take the higher road. No one.
I was not defending Clinton. He had been a selfish, egotistical, dishonest shit bag. His marital fidelity (or lack there of) was between he and his wife, but when he wagged his finger at me and the rest of American and asked us to believe in him-- he crossed a line with me that he can never recross. The only thing that brought me back to a cautious, tepid support was that the Republicans became even more repugnant than Clinton. It was a race to the bottom and in my mind the Republicans won--or lost--however you see it. And they've pretty much stayed down and dirty ever since.
Enter stage left the hopeful, charismatic new comer--Barack Obama. If you are worried if he's got any substance to back up the glow, read The Audacity of Hope. The man has got a mind and a heart to lead this nation. Plus he is humble enough to ask for quality help and open-minded enough to surround himself with differing opinions. He is the real deal. So, Bill, get the *%#@! out of the way.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Hot Damn! We got ourselves a race! But it's gettin' ugly.
Well, I for one am extremely happy that we have a real race for both the Democratic and the Republican nominations this year. There may be hope for our democracy, after all. As the horses left the gate there were a lot more Democratic spectators actually getting themselves to the track and placing their bets, but there was still a high turn out on the Republican side, as well. Now that the "horses" have rounded the first turn, and a few horses have fallen back, but none has taken a commanding lead, voters are started to press the rails for a closer look. It is getting interesting--and in some cases ugly.
Bill Clinton, for instance, is out of control as far as I am concerned. I admire what he was able to do for our country. But the guy has to get out of the way. His temper is not helping the Democratic Party. His rants about Obama not getting enough negative press, his accusations of voter suppression in Nevada, his branding of Obama's Iraq policy as a "fairytale" is all getting to be a bit much. Who of any substance is going to want to be Hillary's vice president? It is as though Bill sees this election as a referendum on his legacy instead of a decision on the best course for our future as a nation. As much as a I fault the Republican organization for their near constant assault on the Clinton White House, and as much as I think the impeachment of our President over a lie about his sex life was inexcusable, I also fault Clinton himself for allowing it to come to that. I will never forget the betrayal I felt for believing President Clinton when he came on TV after the Super Bowl and wagged his finger at me and millions of Americans and said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." Bill Clinton needs to get out of the way and Hillary needs to push him.
Meanwhile, I have been reading Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope, and I am finding it to be much more substantive than I expected it to be. I am pleased. The moment in the debate last week, in which each of the three Democratic candidates was asked to share their biggest weakness was extremely enlightening. Obama was the only one of the three who really stated a weakness. He said he was disorganized with paperwork and that his desk was a mess. Rather than really address any weakness she might have, Clinton jumped on Obama and made the point that the President of the United States has to be able to organize and lead a large government. She came back to this point many times, but let's be real folks. The President of the United States will have a secretary to look after his filing system. Of course, the next President will have to be organized in his thinking and have to oversee a huge bureaucracy, but he also needs to have big, uniting ideas to put this country back on the right course. By the end of the night, I was ready to nominate Hillary as Obama's Chief of Staff.
Today, on the eve of Martin Luther King Day, Obama gave an incredible speech in Atlanta. The speech spoke of a need for unity in both speech and in deed. It was extremely powerful and hopeful.
Click here to see this amazing speech. Recently, however, some of Barack Obama's supporters have taken to accusing the Clinton's of being racist or of down-playing the importance of Martin Luther King, himself. Self-serving the Cintons might be, but racists, I don't think so. This is going to be a real race and Democrats can not be in the business of alienating either Obama's or Clinton's supporters, because they may really need them in the fall.
On the Republican side each contests seems to bring a new line-up at the finish line. Of course, Romney has won more than the others, but for the amount of money he's throw around... Not getting much of a bang for the buck. It's wide open. Even Giuliani hasn't been counted out and he hasn't come close to winning anything, but with his eggs in Florida's basket, and Super Tuesday just beyond, who knows? Huckabee has made quite a showing far less resources than the Romney machine--mostly by being genuine and mentioning Jesus and actually meaning it.
The biggest surprise of all is McCain's resurgence in the polls. He needed the win in South Carolina and he got it. He was counted out months ago and now is coming back. I really think that he is the one that Democrats should fear most. He speaks truth to power and he draws independent voters. Watch out. I myself was a fan of McCain before he started budding up to the same evangelical extremists he had originally denounced as damaging to the party a few years back. But recently he has done some things that really make me think that he may be back to his old self again--seen the error of his ways. He went to South Carolina and announced that he regretted not having spoken out against their flag, which incorporates the cross of the Confederacy, which many see as a divisive symbol -- a constant reminder of a time when blacks were enslaved and later segregated from much of this nation's civic life. I believe Democrats should view him as the most dangerous of the Republicans in their quest to recapture the White House.
In the meantime, Mayor Bloomberg of New York has been down here in Texas and out in California--making the political rounds. I doubt he will step into the race as an independent if McCain wins the Republican nomination, but look for him to seriously consider a run if Huckabee or Guiliani get the nod--especially if they end up being pitted against Clinton. Obama is more widely seen as appealing to independents. Mrs. Clinton is not. How many will be willing to change horses mid-stream? This race is going to get very interesting.
Who will endorse who? Who will be asked to join the tickets in the number two spot? Many things could affect the course of this contest. Currently, the economy is surging as a major issue for the electorate, but there are so many powder kegs around the World that one match could easily set any number of international conflicts ablaze. At least on the Republican side, we can expect to see a couple more jockeys thrown from their mounts and if Edwards comes up lame, and it looks like he might, where will his supporters put their money? He either makes it around the turn in South Carolina or his race is all but over.
The mud is flying and so is the money. There is no safe bet. And the odds keep changing. Could we actually go all the way to the conventions??? That's the political equivalent to a photo finish. And then we'll be off again.
You know, I am disappointed that Biden is not still in the chase. I hold open the hope that Obama will choose him as a vice presidential running mate. I think the two would complement each other nicely on several levels, but whatever happens one thing is sure, the electorate has become more involved than it has been in quite some time. I am pleasantly surprised that pundits were wrong about the front-loading of the election cycle. Many said that it would mean that the eventual nominees would be known even sooner than usual. Almost all agreed that money and establishment organizations would rule the day. But that has not been the case.
Huckabee won Iowa with little cash. Obama has won contests and been competitive in others despite Hillary Clinton's establishment machine. In Nevada, though Obama came in second in the popular vote at the caucuses, he managed to collect one more delegate than Clinton, and she had the former President and the son of the Democratic Majority Leader fighting for her hard in that state. Will we make it all the way to the convention without a nominee in either party? Maybe not, but maybe so. And who'd of thunk it? And when the winners get ready for the photo-op in the winner's circle, will Bloomberg be there to steal the trophy. I don't know race fans, but hold on to those tickets. No pay outs until it's official.
Bill Clinton, for instance, is out of control as far as I am concerned. I admire what he was able to do for our country. But the guy has to get out of the way. His temper is not helping the Democratic Party. His rants about Obama not getting enough negative press, his accusations of voter suppression in Nevada, his branding of Obama's Iraq policy as a "fairytale" is all getting to be a bit much. Who of any substance is going to want to be Hillary's vice president? It is as though Bill sees this election as a referendum on his legacy instead of a decision on the best course for our future as a nation. As much as a I fault the Republican organization for their near constant assault on the Clinton White House, and as much as I think the impeachment of our President over a lie about his sex life was inexcusable, I also fault Clinton himself for allowing it to come to that. I will never forget the betrayal I felt for believing President Clinton when he came on TV after the Super Bowl and wagged his finger at me and millions of Americans and said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." Bill Clinton needs to get out of the way and Hillary needs to push him.
Meanwhile, I have been reading Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope, and I am finding it to be much more substantive than I expected it to be. I am pleased. The moment in the debate last week, in which each of the three Democratic candidates was asked to share their biggest weakness was extremely enlightening. Obama was the only one of the three who really stated a weakness. He said he was disorganized with paperwork and that his desk was a mess. Rather than really address any weakness she might have, Clinton jumped on Obama and made the point that the President of the United States has to be able to organize and lead a large government. She came back to this point many times, but let's be real folks. The President of the United States will have a secretary to look after his filing system. Of course, the next President will have to be organized in his thinking and have to oversee a huge bureaucracy, but he also needs to have big, uniting ideas to put this country back on the right course. By the end of the night, I was ready to nominate Hillary as Obama's Chief of Staff.
Today, on the eve of Martin Luther King Day, Obama gave an incredible speech in Atlanta. The speech spoke of a need for unity in both speech and in deed. It was extremely powerful and hopeful.
Click here to see this amazing speech. Recently, however, some of Barack Obama's supporters have taken to accusing the Clinton's of being racist or of down-playing the importance of Martin Luther King, himself. Self-serving the Cintons might be, but racists, I don't think so. This is going to be a real race and Democrats can not be in the business of alienating either Obama's or Clinton's supporters, because they may really need them in the fall.
On the Republican side each contests seems to bring a new line-up at the finish line. Of course, Romney has won more than the others, but for the amount of money he's throw around... Not getting much of a bang for the buck. It's wide open. Even Giuliani hasn't been counted out and he hasn't come close to winning anything, but with his eggs in Florida's basket, and Super Tuesday just beyond, who knows? Huckabee has made quite a showing far less resources than the Romney machine--mostly by being genuine and mentioning Jesus and actually meaning it.
The biggest surprise of all is McCain's resurgence in the polls. He needed the win in South Carolina and he got it. He was counted out months ago and now is coming back. I really think that he is the one that Democrats should fear most. He speaks truth to power and he draws independent voters. Watch out. I myself was a fan of McCain before he started budding up to the same evangelical extremists he had originally denounced as damaging to the party a few years back. But recently he has done some things that really make me think that he may be back to his old self again--seen the error of his ways. He went to South Carolina and announced that he regretted not having spoken out against their flag, which incorporates the cross of the Confederacy, which many see as a divisive symbol -- a constant reminder of a time when blacks were enslaved and later segregated from much of this nation's civic life. I believe Democrats should view him as the most dangerous of the Republicans in their quest to recapture the White House.
In the meantime, Mayor Bloomberg of New York has been down here in Texas and out in California--making the political rounds. I doubt he will step into the race as an independent if McCain wins the Republican nomination, but look for him to seriously consider a run if Huckabee or Guiliani get the nod--especially if they end up being pitted against Clinton. Obama is more widely seen as appealing to independents. Mrs. Clinton is not. How many will be willing to change horses mid-stream? This race is going to get very interesting.
Who will endorse who? Who will be asked to join the tickets in the number two spot? Many things could affect the course of this contest. Currently, the economy is surging as a major issue for the electorate, but there are so many powder kegs around the World that one match could easily set any number of international conflicts ablaze. At least on the Republican side, we can expect to see a couple more jockeys thrown from their mounts and if Edwards comes up lame, and it looks like he might, where will his supporters put their money? He either makes it around the turn in South Carolina or his race is all but over.
The mud is flying and so is the money. There is no safe bet. And the odds keep changing. Could we actually go all the way to the conventions??? That's the political equivalent to a photo finish. And then we'll be off again.
You know, I am disappointed that Biden is not still in the chase. I hold open the hope that Obama will choose him as a vice presidential running mate. I think the two would complement each other nicely on several levels, but whatever happens one thing is sure, the electorate has become more involved than it has been in quite some time. I am pleasantly surprised that pundits were wrong about the front-loading of the election cycle. Many said that it would mean that the eventual nominees would be known even sooner than usual. Almost all agreed that money and establishment organizations would rule the day. But that has not been the case.
Huckabee won Iowa with little cash. Obama has won contests and been competitive in others despite Hillary Clinton's establishment machine. In Nevada, though Obama came in second in the popular vote at the caucuses, he managed to collect one more delegate than Clinton, and she had the former President and the son of the Democratic Majority Leader fighting for her hard in that state. Will we make it all the way to the convention without a nominee in either party? Maybe not, but maybe so. And who'd of thunk it? And when the winners get ready for the photo-op in the winner's circle, will Bloomberg be there to steal the trophy. I don't know race fans, but hold on to those tickets. No pay outs until it's official.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride!
Man, this election is off the chain! We've got Kerry's cold-blooded endorsement of Obama (take that Edwards) after Clinton's "where did that come from" win in New Hampshire by what before Iowa would have been a disappointing two percentage points but after Iowa seemed like a landslide. We've got a Republican roller coaster ride going on the other side of the park and the voters are lining up at the polls like we haven't see since Memorial Day at Six Flags. Hang on to your seats! My vote might even mean something here in Texas on March 4th if Super Tuesday splits. Wow! I guess Democracy is alive and well. Cool. Maybe the only thing we can thank Bush for is for shaking the electorate awake.
As a Democrat, I am especially pleased, because despite Biden's withdraw from the contest, I still have confidence in the rest of the field. Whoever the nominee is in the end, I will go into the voting booth and place my vote with confidence, pride and optimism. No holding my nose this time around. And I have a little more faith in the Republicans now, too. McCain is doing well and Romney has been disappointed in several contests. Huckabee took Iowa and is alive in South Carolina. They are not goose-stepping their way to the convention for a change. Could it be? Are they actually thinking?!
The whole voting public is along for Mr. Toad's Wild Ride! And it is exhilarating, because people are talking politics again and people are awake.
I met an interesting young man from my alumna mater, Georgetown University, last week. His name is Luke Lagera and he is working under the university's current president on a committee to connect with alumni and see how are college experience affected us and what we'd like to know about our school and so on. We handled the college business in about ten minutes. We spent the next hour talking politics. He's an undergrad. I graduated in '94. He's a Republican. I'm a Democrat. He likes Romney. I called Romney a snake oil salesman. I love Biden. He thinks Biden's Iraq plan is recipe for disaster. He believes in Reagan-nomics. I think the capital gains tax is too low. But we laughed together. We listened to each other--and we actually heard each other. Now we're friends on Facebook. It's a brave new World.
Maybe this election is the start of a new and more positive era. Maybe people are finally getting tired of being afraid of each other and will start to crawl back out of those bunkers it seems we've been hunkered down in for so long. Let's ride this thing together! YeeHa!
As a Democrat, I am especially pleased, because despite Biden's withdraw from the contest, I still have confidence in the rest of the field. Whoever the nominee is in the end, I will go into the voting booth and place my vote with confidence, pride and optimism. No holding my nose this time around. And I have a little more faith in the Republicans now, too. McCain is doing well and Romney has been disappointed in several contests. Huckabee took Iowa and is alive in South Carolina. They are not goose-stepping their way to the convention for a change. Could it be? Are they actually thinking?!
The whole voting public is along for Mr. Toad's Wild Ride! And it is exhilarating, because people are talking politics again and people are awake.
I met an interesting young man from my alumna mater, Georgetown University, last week. His name is Luke Lagera and he is working under the university's current president on a committee to connect with alumni and see how are college experience affected us and what we'd like to know about our school and so on. We handled the college business in about ten minutes. We spent the next hour talking politics. He's an undergrad. I graduated in '94. He's a Republican. I'm a Democrat. He likes Romney. I called Romney a snake oil salesman. I love Biden. He thinks Biden's Iraq plan is recipe for disaster. He believes in Reagan-nomics. I think the capital gains tax is too low. But we laughed together. We listened to each other--and we actually heard each other. Now we're friends on Facebook. It's a brave new World.
Maybe this election is the start of a new and more positive era. Maybe people are finally getting tired of being afraid of each other and will start to crawl back out of those bunkers it seems we've been hunkered down in for so long. Let's ride this thing together! YeeHa!
Sunday, January 06, 2008
The ABC Debate--Long, but revealing
So how many of you were up for a four-hour debate last night? Wow. It was a marathon, but if you did tune in, and and I hope some of you did, I think it was really quite good. Charlie Gibson rocked as a debate moderator. He obviously knew his stuff and used what he knew to really pull information, character "moments" and answers out of the candidates. He was smart without being the center of attention. Good job.
One thing that was really interesting was having the Republican candidates and the Democratic candidates on back to back on the same night. It really gave us a truer snapshot of where people stood. No one group had time to run back to their handlers and regroup based on what went on with the other "team".
That being said, here is my analysis of the evening's contenders:
Republicans:
Ron Paul: Extremely strong showing. Right about the Islamic terrorists being helped by us being in "their" territories. Others, especially Romney and Giuliani tried to dismiss this by saying that the leaders of the Islamic terror machine would have attacked anyway because they are trying for a World-wide Islamic Caliphate (maybe because they like to look smart by showing they learned a new vocabulary word--sounds scary, too!), but while that may be true, those leaders do use our presence in the Middle East as a major recruiting cry. And they are not blowing themselves up. They look for others to do that.
Hopefully people will realize that while Paul does really know the Constitution of the United States, and I think that is very important, if you follow a lot of his policy ideas to their logical end, we could end up in a scary place.
Rudy Giuliani: The man is a goon. Having lived under his "rule" in New York, I applaud him for helping reduce crime, though Clinton's additional new police helped him big time, but his micromanaging of jay walking to the point that from my exit of the subway I had to cross an intersection on three sides to get to work during rush-hour leads to me to believe that this "my way or the highway" power grabber will hold true to the Republican view of limited government only when it suits him--and God help us if it doesn't suit him. I find it hard to listen to the man in the debates. If he hadn't fought the mob as a prosecutor, he might well have gotten a job as one of their enforcers.
Mitt Romney: This guy is a modern day snake oil salesman and God help the poor souls who buy what he's selling, because the guarantee will not be worth the paper it is printed on. He will close shop and reopen one selling an antidote the next week and try to sell you that. Plus, he's mean. The attack ads he has run are mean spirited even for politics--and these are against members of his own party! Doesn't he remember Reagan's 11th commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.? No wonder everyone is ganging up on him. This guy is making DeLay look saintly.
John McCain: Kept his cool and stayed out of the mud. Classy showing last night. I just wish he had stayed away from the Evangelical hate mongers he had originally denounced a few years ago--that really left a sour taste in my mouth. McCain may yet rise again, though, because agree with him or not, he doesn't tell you what you want to hear just to make nice and win a vote (one of the things I most admire in Biden, as well). He was out on the morning shows today --Face the Nation and Meet the Press-- standing by his statement that he would be fine with leaving American troops in Iraq indefinitely-- like in South Korea or Japan. Don't count this veteran out--even if he has seemed more a loyal soldier than a leader during much of Bush's second term.
Mike Huckabee: Sounded pretty good last night. Surprisingly he didn't say anything too stupid and he has a sense of humor, which is refreshing. I'm still a little nervous about the guy, as he is running around with Chuck Norris all the time, but you have to give it up for a guy who is doing all he is without a bunch of consultants to back him up. I do think that despite his win in Iowa, he got a little break last night, as the rest of the field piled onto Romney (deservedly). The goal here is to knock Romney out and then take care of Huckabee if he still hasn't shot himself in the foot. His aw shucks populism is novel for a Republican--and sincere to boot. People need to start asking: What is in the water in Hope, Arkansas?
Fred Thompson: Looked a lot more presidential than we've seen in a while. Overall, a strong showing. Seemed in control of his message, but a bit of a throwback for the Year of Change, though. I don't hear anything new from this guy, but I loved him on Law and Order.
Democrats:
Bill Richardson: What a nice guy. And I thank him for giving an honest answer to Charlie Gibson's question of what specifically he'd take back saying in one the debates, but he is playing in the Minor Leagues here. I hate to say it, because he is a genuinely nice human being and he cares about and is knows a lot about Latin American, which we all know is a big interest of mine. I even praised an interview he gave in a Colombian daily a few blog entries ago, but I don't see him closing the deal--especially in any of the next few states.
Barack Obama: A disclosure--I am now supporting him since Biden is out. He looked a little tired, especially in the cut-aways, but I think he did well--looked Presidential enough, didn't sink too low into personal attacks on Hillary (Obama will need to stay positive to keep his luster), but made his points when it counted. No major mistakes, which has to be his goal going into New Hampshire, because I think South Carolina is his to take. His lack of real fight put him above the fray, while reaffirming for me my contention that he is the one who is humble enough to reach out for help when he needs it.
Hillary Clinton: Okay, Hillary, we know you have worked really, really hard and we are so proud of you. Do you want a gold star now? Clinton spent the first half of the debate feeling sorry for herself and lashing out at the other candidates and, in a way, us trying to desperately shake us into realizing what we obviously are too stupid to see--that she is supposed to be the next President, because she works hard. Maybe in the back of her mind she is adding "and I was a loyal soldier and I stood by that philandering good ol' boy for all of you, damn it." She did have a much better second half though, laughing at herself about getting her feelings hurt that someone might like another candidate more. She lightened up and lightened her load, which I think helped her connect to us and deliver her message much better. Do not ever count her out. She is a fighter. And, she does work hard.
John Edwards: Won this thing. He was feisty without being rude. He made his points clearly and they seemed heart-felt as well as pretty on the money for a Democratic crowd--or even for Independents who don't like where Bush has dragged us. Second place in New Hampshire would keep him in this thing. Maybe Clinton peaked too early. That is Edwards only hope to eventually taking down Obama (or Obama has to really screw up). I don't think this debate is enough to propel Edwards to the nomination, but if he gets it, this is where we can all say he turned the tables. I just don't think that he has done enough for me lately--as in since 2004. Next.
I'd love to hear what you all think! Drop me a comment.
One thing that was really interesting was having the Republican candidates and the Democratic candidates on back to back on the same night. It really gave us a truer snapshot of where people stood. No one group had time to run back to their handlers and regroup based on what went on with the other "team".
That being said, here is my analysis of the evening's contenders:
Republicans:
Ron Paul: Extremely strong showing. Right about the Islamic terrorists being helped by us being in "their" territories. Others, especially Romney and Giuliani tried to dismiss this by saying that the leaders of the Islamic terror machine would have attacked anyway because they are trying for a World-wide Islamic Caliphate (maybe because they like to look smart by showing they learned a new vocabulary word--sounds scary, too!), but while that may be true, those leaders do use our presence in the Middle East as a major recruiting cry. And they are not blowing themselves up. They look for others to do that.
Hopefully people will realize that while Paul does really know the Constitution of the United States, and I think that is very important, if you follow a lot of his policy ideas to their logical end, we could end up in a scary place.
Rudy Giuliani: The man is a goon. Having lived under his "rule" in New York, I applaud him for helping reduce crime, though Clinton's additional new police helped him big time, but his micromanaging of jay walking to the point that from my exit of the subway I had to cross an intersection on three sides to get to work during rush-hour leads to me to believe that this "my way or the highway" power grabber will hold true to the Republican view of limited government only when it suits him--and God help us if it doesn't suit him. I find it hard to listen to the man in the debates. If he hadn't fought the mob as a prosecutor, he might well have gotten a job as one of their enforcers.
Mitt Romney: This guy is a modern day snake oil salesman and God help the poor souls who buy what he's selling, because the guarantee will not be worth the paper it is printed on. He will close shop and reopen one selling an antidote the next week and try to sell you that. Plus, he's mean. The attack ads he has run are mean spirited even for politics--and these are against members of his own party! Doesn't he remember Reagan's 11th commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.? No wonder everyone is ganging up on him. This guy is making DeLay look saintly.
John McCain: Kept his cool and stayed out of the mud. Classy showing last night. I just wish he had stayed away from the Evangelical hate mongers he had originally denounced a few years ago--that really left a sour taste in my mouth. McCain may yet rise again, though, because agree with him or not, he doesn't tell you what you want to hear just to make nice and win a vote (one of the things I most admire in Biden, as well). He was out on the morning shows today --Face the Nation and Meet the Press-- standing by his statement that he would be fine with leaving American troops in Iraq indefinitely-- like in South Korea or Japan. Don't count this veteran out--even if he has seemed more a loyal soldier than a leader during much of Bush's second term.
Mike Huckabee: Sounded pretty good last night. Surprisingly he didn't say anything too stupid and he has a sense of humor, which is refreshing. I'm still a little nervous about the guy, as he is running around with Chuck Norris all the time, but you have to give it up for a guy who is doing all he is without a bunch of consultants to back him up. I do think that despite his win in Iowa, he got a little break last night, as the rest of the field piled onto Romney (deservedly). The goal here is to knock Romney out and then take care of Huckabee if he still hasn't shot himself in the foot. His aw shucks populism is novel for a Republican--and sincere to boot. People need to start asking: What is in the water in Hope, Arkansas?
Fred Thompson: Looked a lot more presidential than we've seen in a while. Overall, a strong showing. Seemed in control of his message, but a bit of a throwback for the Year of Change, though. I don't hear anything new from this guy, but I loved him on Law and Order.
Democrats:
Bill Richardson: What a nice guy. And I thank him for giving an honest answer to Charlie Gibson's question of what specifically he'd take back saying in one the debates, but he is playing in the Minor Leagues here. I hate to say it, because he is a genuinely nice human being and he cares about and is knows a lot about Latin American, which we all know is a big interest of mine. I even praised an interview he gave in a Colombian daily a few blog entries ago, but I don't see him closing the deal--especially in any of the next few states.
Barack Obama: A disclosure--I am now supporting him since Biden is out. He looked a little tired, especially in the cut-aways, but I think he did well--looked Presidential enough, didn't sink too low into personal attacks on Hillary (Obama will need to stay positive to keep his luster), but made his points when it counted. No major mistakes, which has to be his goal going into New Hampshire, because I think South Carolina is his to take. His lack of real fight put him above the fray, while reaffirming for me my contention that he is the one who is humble enough to reach out for help when he needs it.
Hillary Clinton: Okay, Hillary, we know you have worked really, really hard and we are so proud of you. Do you want a gold star now? Clinton spent the first half of the debate feeling sorry for herself and lashing out at the other candidates and, in a way, us trying to desperately shake us into realizing what we obviously are too stupid to see--that she is supposed to be the next President, because she works hard. Maybe in the back of her mind she is adding "and I was a loyal soldier and I stood by that philandering good ol' boy for all of you, damn it." She did have a much better second half though, laughing at herself about getting her feelings hurt that someone might like another candidate more. She lightened up and lightened her load, which I think helped her connect to us and deliver her message much better. Do not ever count her out. She is a fighter. And, she does work hard.
John Edwards: Won this thing. He was feisty without being rude. He made his points clearly and they seemed heart-felt as well as pretty on the money for a Democratic crowd--or even for Independents who don't like where Bush has dragged us. Second place in New Hampshire would keep him in this thing. Maybe Clinton peaked too early. That is Edwards only hope to eventually taking down Obama (or Obama has to really screw up). I don't think this debate is enough to propel Edwards to the nomination, but if he gets it, this is where we can all say he turned the tables. I just don't think that he has done enough for me lately--as in since 2004. Next.
I'd love to hear what you all think! Drop me a comment.
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Experience and Change: Obama-Biden
I recently joined a new Facebook community, Obama/Biden 2008, started by Matthew Ellison. One of the members, Kevin Cho, put together a fabulous video which I'd like to share. Click here to check it out.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Joe Biden, you're a class act. And why I'm choosing to support Obama post-Iowa
Well folks, it was a crushing defeat for my man, Joe, in Iowa Thursday night. But Joe Biden won't let us be sad. He isn't and we shouldn't be either. Because Joe Biden is a true statesman, who led an honest, open campaign not directed by polls or focus groups but by his intellect, his experience and his heart. The man gave the most up beat, most grateful and gratifying concession speech I've ever heard. I am inspired by him even in his "defeat"--though he is not defeated. Click here to see Joe's concession speech. Joe Biden, you're a class act.
All this being said, now I have to make a new decision. Back in the summer, I included in this blog a list of the Democratic candidates in the order I would consider supporting them. At that time, I listed Barack Obama pretty far back in the pack. I felt he really lacked the experience and the gravitas to be the next President of the United States--at least in comparison to other Democratic candidates. Well, I've changed my mind. I don't think he has picked up tons of new experience, but I have reordered my list, because I have become less enchanted with other candidates and because I have begun to see elements of brilliance and inspiration in Obama's oratory. Click here to see Obama's speech just after his big win in Iowa.
So why not Hillary? Well, it seems that she just wants to be in charge. It seems like her attitude is "I've worked harder than the rest of you. I deserve this more than you." Maybe so, but honey, nobody is going to be right all the time -- even if you deserve it and I just don't think you are going to find it easy to really ask for the help and input you need from people who might not think the same way you do. Nobody is always the smartest person in the room. And if you find you are--it is time to find a new room.
Why not Edwards? Well, I actually voted for him the last time around and I really believe there are two Americas. I am even more sure of it after reading Conscience of a Liberal by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. But, what have you done for me lately? What have you done for anyone lately, except yourself, since you and Kerry lost the 2004 election? Tooting your own horn and whining about the state of things is not enough.
And folks, barring unforeseen forces like alien invasion (and I mean from outer space, not Mexico) there is no chance that any other candidate is going to win the Democratic nomination, because the news media will not allow it. Nor will the pollsters. According to Iowans writing on the Joe Biden page on Facebook, pollsters would call and ask who was their choice for the nomination. They would answer "Biden" the next question would be something like "Which candidate do you think is strongest in the foreign policy arena--Clinton, Edwards or Obama?" If a Biden supporter said, "None of them, I think Biden is strongest", they would be asked the question again. If they still said "Biden" they were listed as undecided. After Iowa, things are not going to get more open.
As far as I am concerned the media, which mostly means a few, very large corporations, has done this country a horrible disservice by focusing in so early on a few "celebrity" candidates and have attempted to frame the debate in this season into sound bites like "Experience or Change"--implying that they are mutually exclusive. We can and should bemoan this--and loudly. That being said, we are where we are and we have to choose someone who can win. I am going to support Barack Obama.
Why? Well, unlike Edwards and Clinton, he did not readily throw himself into the ring. A run for the Presidency of the United States was not part of his plan for 2008. I am not saying that the thought of one day running had never entered his mind, but he is only 47 years old and he had time. Barack Obama was courted--and courted heavily--to run. Barack himself searched his soul to see if he felt that he was ready to take on this awesome job. And I think, that this man is self-aware enough to know that while he will have to be, in the words of our current President, "the decider", that he will have to surround himself with smart, experienced people. And I think he will actually listen to them. I think that of the three front runners, Obama is the most humble. The most secure with himself to ask for help when he needs it. When we need it. And if he makes a mistake, I think like Kennedy, after the Bay of Pigs, he will be able to recover.
The art of living is getting back up. -Joe Biden
All this being said, now I have to make a new decision. Back in the summer, I included in this blog a list of the Democratic candidates in the order I would consider supporting them. At that time, I listed Barack Obama pretty far back in the pack. I felt he really lacked the experience and the gravitas to be the next President of the United States--at least in comparison to other Democratic candidates. Well, I've changed my mind. I don't think he has picked up tons of new experience, but I have reordered my list, because I have become less enchanted with other candidates and because I have begun to see elements of brilliance and inspiration in Obama's oratory. Click here to see Obama's speech just after his big win in Iowa.
So why not Hillary? Well, it seems that she just wants to be in charge. It seems like her attitude is "I've worked harder than the rest of you. I deserve this more than you." Maybe so, but honey, nobody is going to be right all the time -- even if you deserve it and I just don't think you are going to find it easy to really ask for the help and input you need from people who might not think the same way you do. Nobody is always the smartest person in the room. And if you find you are--it is time to find a new room.
Why not Edwards? Well, I actually voted for him the last time around and I really believe there are two Americas. I am even more sure of it after reading Conscience of a Liberal by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. But, what have you done for me lately? What have you done for anyone lately, except yourself, since you and Kerry lost the 2004 election? Tooting your own horn and whining about the state of things is not enough.
And folks, barring unforeseen forces like alien invasion (and I mean from outer space, not Mexico) there is no chance that any other candidate is going to win the Democratic nomination, because the news media will not allow it. Nor will the pollsters. According to Iowans writing on the Joe Biden page on Facebook, pollsters would call and ask who was their choice for the nomination. They would answer "Biden" the next question would be something like "Which candidate do you think is strongest in the foreign policy arena--Clinton, Edwards or Obama?" If a Biden supporter said, "None of them, I think Biden is strongest", they would be asked the question again. If they still said "Biden" they were listed as undecided. After Iowa, things are not going to get more open.
As far as I am concerned the media, which mostly means a few, very large corporations, has done this country a horrible disservice by focusing in so early on a few "celebrity" candidates and have attempted to frame the debate in this season into sound bites like "Experience or Change"--implying that they are mutually exclusive. We can and should bemoan this--and loudly. That being said, we are where we are and we have to choose someone who can win. I am going to support Barack Obama.
Why? Well, unlike Edwards and Clinton, he did not readily throw himself into the ring. A run for the Presidency of the United States was not part of his plan for 2008. I am not saying that the thought of one day running had never entered his mind, but he is only 47 years old and he had time. Barack Obama was courted--and courted heavily--to run. Barack himself searched his soul to see if he felt that he was ready to take on this awesome job. And I think, that this man is self-aware enough to know that while he will have to be, in the words of our current President, "the decider", that he will have to surround himself with smart, experienced people. And I think he will actually listen to them. I think that of the three front runners, Obama is the most humble. The most secure with himself to ask for help when he needs it. When we need it. And if he makes a mistake, I think like Kennedy, after the Bay of Pigs, he will be able to recover.
The art of living is getting back up. -Joe Biden
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
