Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Anti-Obama Hate-Fest
The Republican Party, which has defined modern-day negative politics, was back at it again, bashing Barack Obama and the news media in an ugly display that rivaled the old days of Nixon-Agnew - or George W. Bush's last convention where GOP operatives passed out "Purple Heart Band-Aids" to mock John Kerry's war wounds.
After a slow start because of Hurricane Gustav, the convention in St. Paul, Minnesota, has turned into an anti-Obama hate-fest with a nearly all-white gathering laughing at and mocking the nation's first African-American presidential nominee of a major party.
However, beyond the pulsating contempt visible on the faces of the GOP delegates, many of the nasty attacks on Obama - as well as the effusive praise for the Republican ticket - were blatantly false, as if testing the depths of American gullibility and bigotry.
In speech after speech, Republicans didn't so much as tell the Big Lie as they deployed Wholesale Lies.
The Associated Press, which mostly had been recycling the Republican spin about the supposedly "maverick" ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin, was so struck by the litany of distortions that the AP produced a special fact-checking article describing how Republicans had "stretched the truth."
For instance, Palin said about Obama, "it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate."
However, as the AP noted, Obama "worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year."
Plus, the AP reported, "In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation."
The AP's fact-checking article noted, too, that former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's slap at Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden - that Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States" - was a "whopper."
The AP wrote that "Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries."
Parallel Reality
The Republican National Convention also acted as if the Republicans had not controlled the White House for the past eight years and the Congress for most of that time.
"We need change, all right," declared former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, "change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington - throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."
Beyond this parallel universe of who runs Washington, there was fanciful puffery about the GOP "reformer" ticket - dubbed "maverick squared" - that doesn't square with reality at all.
For instance, the AP cited Palin's claim that "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
The reality, of course, was much different.
As the AP noted. Palin, as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla, hired a lobbyist and made annual treks to Washington seeking earmarked spending that totaled $27 million, and then as Alaska's governor for less than two years, she sought nearly $750 million in special federal spending, "by far the largest per-capita request in the nation."
And as for that $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents, the truth is that Palin enthusiastically supported the project before she reluctantly opposed it, rejecting the "Bridge to Nowhere" only after it had become politically indefensible.
The Los Angeles Times discovered that Sen. McCain had specifically cited several of Palin's earmarks on his annual list of wasteful pork-barrel spending.
In 2001, for instance, McCain's list included a $500,000 earmark for a public transportation project in Wasilla, and in 2002, he criticized $1 million targeted for an emergency communications center that Palin sought but local law enforcement said was redundant and a source of confusion.
Remaking Palin
Now, however, Palin has been transformed into a maverick reformer. McCain's campaign even cites her experience as an abuser of the earmark process as part of the reason she supposedly understands why it must be scrapped.
McCain spokesman Taylor Griffin said Palin's successes in getting earmarked funds "was one of the formative experiences that led her toward the reform-oriented stance that she has taken as her career has progressed."
Nevertheless, Palin wrote in a newspaper column just this year that "the federal budget, in its various manifestations, is incredibly important to us, and congressional earmarks are one aspect of this relationship." [For more details, see Los Angeles Times, Sept. 3, 2008]
Beyond the GOP's reality-challenged speeches, there was the startling image of a nearly all-white convention - where only 36 of the 2,380 delegates were black, the smallest number in at least 40 years - rollicking in ridicule and bristling with animosity toward Obama, an African-American.
With their loud chants of "drill, baby, drill" regarding energy policy and boisterous shouts of "USA, USA" about "victory" in Iraq, there was a sense that St. Paul was hosting a convention of American Falangists, rather than that of a modern national party.
The whiff of authoritarianism extended to outside where demonstrators and journalists were swept off the streets in indiscriminate arrests.
What's less clear about the GOP convention is whether the Republicans are on to something, that perhaps the United States has crossed over into a post-rational society that cares little about facts and reality or serious policy ideas and respectful debate, but rather is a nation moved by anger and ridicule, fear and nationalism.
- Posted in
116 Comments so far
Show All"What's less clear about the GOP convention is whether the Republicans are on to something, that perhaps the United States has crossed over into a post-rational society that cares little about facts and reality ...?" Certainly, the Republican Party has, but, so has the Democratic Party by caring little about the facts and reality that George W. Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors and that the Constitution demands impeachment proceed. Two corrupt Corporate parties protecting the status quo they are. Run Ralph. Run!
"perhaps the United States has crossed over into a post-rational society"
We've had a post rational President for the last eight years. Do you remember Bush's inaugural address when he talked about seeing "The angel in the whirlwind".
Scary stuff!
Quoting from the following article by Patrick Martin, entitled "McCain Launches Fall Campaign as Obama Embraces Iraq 'Surge'” --
"The most important factor propping up both the Bush administration and the Republican presidential campaign is the complicity and cowardice of the Democratic Party. McCain’s claim to be leading an insurgency against the government of his own party is undoubtedly preposterous, but he is able to adopt this posture with at least a fig leaf of credibility because the Democratic Party does not fulfill the role of an 'opposition' party in any serious sense.
"Obama’s performance Thursday on Fox television’s 'The O’Reilly Factor' was a case in point. After winning the Democratic nomination in large measure because of his purported opposition to the war in Iraq, Obama has sought repeatedly to demonstrate to the US political establishment that he can be a credible commander in chief for American imperialism.
"He told O’Reilly that he 'absolutely' believed that the United States was engaged in a worldwide war against terrorism, including not only Al Qaeda and the Taliban, but 'a whole host of networks that are bent on attacking America who have a distorted ideology.'
"Obama described Iran as a 'major threat,' and said it would be 'unacceptable' to an Obama administration for Iran to possess nuclear weapons. 'It would be a game-changer,' he said, adding, 'I would never take a military option off the table.' He called for a more aggressive military posture towards Pakistan, the day after a major US military strike within that country.
"But his starkest reversal came on Iraq, as O’Reilly pressed him to admit that the Bush administration’s troop 'surge,' the escalation of the war by the addition of some 30,000 US combat troops, had been a success. Obama has sought to dance around the issue for months, but he finally embraced the surge emphatically on Thursday.
"'I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,' he said, adding, 'It’s succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.' This demonstrates not only Obama’s cringing submission to the pressure of the right wing, but a staggering degree of political blindness. Like Bush, Cheney, McCain and the rest of official Washington, Obama truly believes that US imperialism can, by military force alone, impose its will on the world. His only disagreement is with the Bush administration’s obsessive focus on Iraq, which Obama and many other spokesmen for the military and foreign policy establishment believe has undermined US interests in other parts of the globe.
"The Democratic Party is a capitalist party that defends the same social interests as the Republicans—the massive fortunes of the superrich financial aristocracy which is the real ruling force in American society. The Democrats play a specific role in the political division of labor: while the Republicans consistently and unabashedly uphold the rights of the wealthy, the Democrats pretend to represent working people, while ensuring that there is no challenge from below to the profit system.
"This division of labor explains the half-hearted and spineless performance of the Democrats in the current presidential campaign. Obama, Biden & Co. are at pains to demonstrate that they will make no appeal to mass discontent that goes beyond what is acceptable to the ruling elite. The Democrats offer their services to the financial oligarchy to win at least a certain degree of mass support for the reactionary program that both parties fundamentally share."
Click here for the entire article -- http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/mcca-s06.shtml
Spoiler Alert, Tom.
All republicans are scum. To be fair, most Democrats are, too.
Great! Equal treatment at least!
The Republicans know this;
Any 'lie,' no matter how falsely horrible, can't be defended.
To attempt to do so keeps the 'lie,' the allegation, alive in viewer's minds.
Into The Looking Glass.
There's little doubt that the republican party has become a fascist entity, but that's just one more problem on a long list that the Obama administration will have to deal with. If Obama and Biden do their jobs right, Bush and Cheney will be tried for war crimes. The fall-out from the prosecution will cause the republican party to be justifiably ground into dust and buried along with the other fascist regimes in history. It'll be a bright day in America when that happens, and the rest of the world will rejoice as well.
Obviously you have little understanding of the American political system, and who it serves.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
"76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries."
That comes out to 3311.5 votes per state. Wow that's sure impressive. If biden is so qualified to be next in line for the top slot wouldn't he have gotten more votes?
176.000 votes more than Palin...who got zero, because she didnt have the guts or experience to run...If she is so qualified to take over as president from an aging and soon dead "Maverick", why didn't she have the guts to throw her hat in the ring two years ago and duke it out with the rest?
It is easy to slime your way into the ring during the final round of a fight and land a lucky punch on a fighter tired from 19 months of campaigning....but she is a nobody, soon to go back to nowheresville
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Not that I like any of these creeps, but didn't the people who dropped out of the race do so because they got less MONEY? It appears that in Todays version of "Democracy" if you have the money you can buy the votes... I mean buy a chance to be in the debates, and buy the right to be considered a serious candidate by the corporate media. Buy it with the money the corporations give you. After that even the voters will give you money!
Why should any one who cares about children care if there is an anti-Obama or anti-McCain hate fest?
Obama will kill more children in Afghanistan and Pakistan, continuing the Bush tradition and McCain will do the same as Obama.
Obama also wants to off-shore dirll, and if does not get his oil that way, he'll be just as ready to slaughter as McCain. And then he'll get the victims of rape and pillage to pay for the privelage of being raped and pillage. Did you all listen to his interview with O'Rielly? Him and O'Rielly are going to Iraq to collect the bill, why? 'Cause Iraq has a surplus. Any half-way decent human being would throw up on Obama/McCain.
The choices for half-way decent human Americans:
a. Don't Vote
If you insist on voting:
b. Vote for Nader and/or McKiney
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
"perhaps the United States has crossed over into a post-rational society that cares little about facts and reality or serious policy ideas and respectful debate, but rather is a nation moved by anger and ridicule, fear and nationalism."
This is fascism musawwir. Our best hope right now is to stop pre-judging what Obama will do when he's elected, work to get him in, and then hold him accountable. Your holding him accountable right now, and he hasn't done anything but talk. Give him a chance to further our progressive agenda, and to push back on this authoritarian plunge. The only other viable alternative--McCain--may very well push this country beyond any chance at redemption.
"Your holding him accountable right now, and he hasn't done anything but talk."
Exactly how else do you hold a candidate accountable other than base it on what he says what he will do?
We already know what Obama will do, based on what he himself has said: he will expand the war in Afghanistan and take it Pakistan, and will force Iraq to pay for the rape and pillage that the US delivered on that country (and he invited O'Rielly to go with him to Iraq -what a buffoon).
Based on what Obama himself has said, he has no intention of furthering any progressive agenda (other than some right wing Democratic Party progressive agenda -that is nothing more than a rehash of project for new american century).
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
Call it wishful thinking, call it naive; but I think we have to look beyond platforms, policy positions and speeches, and look at the character of the man. And from what I've seen he has the right character. Super smart, empathetic, a world view that's not totally US-centric and a willingness to listen to others, among other positive traits. I'm not saying he's perfect, just that we can't expect more in someone vying for high office.
Why look beyond talk? Because I think that any candidate who runs on a true progressives platform will get knocked down by the corporate media. Imagine running on a progressive platform---you'd get as much traction as say---Ralph Nader.
Respect.
The character of the man, eh? Is it in good character to kill innocents by funding an illegal, brutal war? There's more .......
1) Voted consistently to continue the illegal, brutal wars. Millions of innocents dead - mostly children.
2) Promises to continue the illegal wars, increase troops.
3) Voted to give telecom corporations immunity from the law that says the government can't spy on citizens.
4) Voted against a bill that would put a 35% interest rate cap on what lenders can charge - the poor are the ones mostly suffering from these high interest loans.
5) Sides with Israelis in their apartheid system, stealing land from the Palestinians and killing their people. Deaths: 10 Palestinians to 1 Israeli.
6) In favor of the death penalty.
7) Said Joseph Lieberman was his "mentor."
8) Is against single-payer health care in favor of corporate subsidized health care.
9) Does not believe Bush should have been impeached.
Hey Hank I love your list! I have several of my own:
1. A vote for Obama will not end the occupation.
2. Obama wants to increase military spending.
3. Obama's advisers want to keep Bush's Defense Secretary Roberts Gates.
4. Obama wants more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones.
5. Obama wants to add an additional 90,000 troops.
6. Obama wants to intensify the war in Afghanistan.
7. Obama wants to keep over 60,000 troops in Iraq to guard "our" oil.
Perhaps true. However, Obama is by far the lesser of evils here. McSame and Palin are on a mission from God to bring about the end of times.
myconscience September 6th, 2008 10:48 am, There is no major difference between the two duopolistic mainstream parties of Big Business Inc. On the big picture of say, imperialism and militarism, both are in perfect agreement.
The Dems don't criticize the war for being an illegal/immoral war of aggression based on lies. Obama's critique centers on the need to take some troops out of Iraq and send them to Afghanistan where he believes the central front on terror should be. Obama has now even embraced the surge.
What is the difference between Obama and McCAin on the war/occupations?
If you oppose militarism then it's time to break with the Democrats. "Democrat Barack Obama, in an interview on Fox television, waved the white flag on what had once been the principal issue in his campaign, the war in Iraq. He told right-wing talk show host Bill O’Reilly that the escalation of US military aggression in Iraq, dubbed the “surge” by Bush and McCain, had “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.” He went on to threaten military action against Iran as well."
To read more: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/mcca-s06.shtml
1. Not started by him or his party---a political calculation to "support the troops". Last time he said "NO" to more funds.
2. Only Iraq war is considered Illegal by UN and international law, and he's promised to end it. Afghanistan war has international approval.
3. Yes, a back-stabbing flip-flop. But we don't know the whole picture.
4. A stupid bill written by the Republicans, I believe, before they lost congress---Don't no why he voted for it.
5. No, he wants to end the conflict with a two state solution.
6. Never heard that, but you could be right.
7. Everyone who enters the Senate is ASSIGNED a mentor---had no choice.
8. Wants to eventually get to single payer, but is pragmatically dealing with the state we are in.
9. I never heard that, impeachment will NOT succeed in removing the shrub from office anyway---there must be a 3/4 vote in the Senate for that. Better to prosecute him after he leaves office.
I look at Obama's character and what I see is a delusional self-serving egomaniac.
I see Obama and I simply see a sell out. He's willing to sell his heart and his soul to become the first "Black" president.
madcow lives in a never-never-land where we are supposed to ignore what candidates say, promise and do and just "trust" them because we wish it so. Oh my God are you serious?
I knew this would get a rise out of the usual Obama-bashers. But none of them address my point of WHY we must look beyond talk at character. Any candidate who runs on a progressive platform will get knocked down by the corporate media. Like Howard Dean (the screech), Dennis Kucinich (doesn't have the stature), Mike Gravel (lost it)...
madcow, ever consider taking your eco la la to the neverland site?
See, attack me if you can't answer the question... Brilliant!
Obama has had plenty of chances to "further our progressive agenda" and what is it he's done? You tell me.
Howard Zinn says McCain is just slightly to the right of Obama. SLIGHLTY! And you think he's going to further the progressive agenda? Where do you get these delusions?
Obama voted to give telecoms immunity from our laws. He has voted in favor of funding the illegal, brutal wars, millions of innocents have been killed, mostly CHILDREN. This is good reason to withhold support.
What would make you not vote for a Democrat? If a Democrat voted to have people's legs chopped off, you'd still vote for him if the Repub promised to chop of the hands as well? That's how it is designed. The Repugs set a far right standard and the Dems are right there, supporting and enabling .... a little complaining is all voters seem to need from them. Nothing substantial.
And every election it gets worse because voters go along with the Dems who go along with Republicans. We are being boiled like a frog ........ BY DESIGN!
Vote Nader, 08
Well said musawwir!
Both candidates promise more KILLING OF INNOCENTS. What more do we need to know? The wars are illegal by US law and constitutional law and we all know that. Why would anyone, especially a progressive thinker, support a candidate who promises to continue illegal, unconstitutional wars? Weird.
Why are progressives mostly silent about the illegality of these military aggressions?
I know: They don't want to spoil the chances of the Democrats.
Why don't progressives have any teeth left?
Answer: The Democrat Party kicked them all out. Now all they can do is beg and harbor delusions.
Change begins in your living room. If you look to Washington you will drown in disappointment. Change yourself if you can.
This is a typical blog: Don't look to Obama as savior and change yourself...etc. What is this supposed to mean during an election year? Give politicians a pass on their horrible record (like Obama's record of the funding war) and just vote for him anyway and change myself? That will make it all better?
Changing myself will end the illegal/immoral occupation and bring Bush to justice? Gee I had no idea it was that simple. Thanks.
Obama is currently given sole credit for the taped interrogations/confessions bill, but if you look back at actual 2003 news articles you'll see that other people are given credit. Rep Monique Davis (the freak who hates atheists) was the House Sponsor of the bill, and Gov Blagojevich signed it into law. Davis is the one who is given most of the credit. Why is it that I can't find, even in the Illinois newspapers, any significant mention of Obama for this matter ?
I have to appreciate the Republicans' offensive moves ! They know Obama's main whine is about racism, so they'll steer completely clear of that and totally divert the attention to other matters. And look what has already happened, the rabid Obama groupies on Kos and other sites have already been foaming at the mouth with salacious stories about Palin's alleged faked pregnancy. Yah, "drill baby drill" was scary, but conspiracy pregnancy theories are hardly better.
Obama's pick of Biden was his biggest mistake, perhaps fatal. Biden had FIVE DEFERMENTS during the Viet Nam war ! As many as Cheney had ! You know this issue is going to come up, and it's no doubt one of the reasons why McCain took the time to describe his experience as a POW. I did not know the full story, I have to admit I was moved by it. He's not a hero because he was captured, he's a hero because he refused his captors' offer of release because he knew other men should have been released before him. That takes a hell of a lot of courage.
Democrats want to lose. That's why Biden was picked. That's why Obama voted FISA, and why he promises to INCREASE both the military budget and troops in Afghanistan. They want to kick off the progressive hangers-on (maybe 5 or 6%) because the duopoly knows full well:
If Obama wins, the party will have to stand stark naked in the light. Can't have that! It will end the duopoly's firm grip on the American political process. Obama will not change anything for the better and I think we all know that by now. And there will be no one left to blame with Repubs in the minority - although the duopoly is genius at designing excuses for themselves. And they know most progressives will swallow it.
Better for the Dems to help get McCain elected and then BLAME those of us - Nader, McKinney - who just couldn't stomach voting for another fascist leaning candidate. After over forty years of voting for Dems and getting nothing in return, I finally get their message: GO AWAY!
PREDICTION: McCain will win. I will be vilified, maligned, marginalized ... again for refusing to go along. "Obama never got the chance!" they will rail. The left will be further divided between the tag-along Democrats and those of us who are now supporting other parties or independents. Obama will get an attractive promotion for his role and the empire will move ahead.
Vote Nader, 08!
If they "choose to lose", it must be because they know the country is in the biggest shit mess since the 1930s and they want someone else to clean up their own mess for a change. "Not much money, ew, but honey--aint we go t fun?!"
So, in other words, there is no hope to change the rotten system...
Change can only come by sheer force of the American people. Obama, McCain, Pelosi, Bush .... all of them work for the same corporations. It's called fascism. You don't fight that by withholding information like many on the left are doing. Take a look at articles here on Common Dreams. Barely a mention of the millions of innocents killed - children - in this illegal war. Why? Because Obama promises more of the same. They don't want to spoil his chances. They'd rather not talk about it. It's an ugly time.
Turn on television and you can see how the corporations sell items. Can you see the folksy, often rather progressive feel to some of the ads? It sells products. The duopoly is doing this with the electorate. It's all a sales pitch, both parties, both corrupt, both in collusion with the other party to keep it going. Fascism.
You make good points Hank. Unfortunately the "sheer force of the American people" is directed to vote for "American Idol" and issues surrounding the presidential elections have been sorely muted. It is the media, and their paymasters... and yes it's an ugly time.
I've gotten rid of my television for just that reason.
There is ONLY hope. One may hope that well intentioned but misled democrats like you will understand that it is not an issue of dem vs. repub but of the people vs. the corporations that own our government. When good folks, as I believe you to be, realise that the solution is not Obama, not McCain, but a complete revising of our system of elections and governance that removes the power of money from the process and replaces it with the power of the people..
I believe that one day you will understand that it is only by working to bring a third party presence to the government, a party pledged to avoid all corporate funding, whose elected politicians will not seek to retire as six and seven figure lobbyists, that will restore the thrust of our government to caring for its own citizenry.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Thanks for the kind words ardee. I do realize that part of the solution is a complete revising of our system of elections and governance that removes money and corps. I also believe that a parliamentary system would improve things---where small parties can join coalitions and leave them if their interests are not met...
If we had that system, I would vote Green in a heartbeat. But as it stands now, it's winner take all. I'm voting for Obama because of the two parties who WILL govern us for the next four years, I see the Dem. party as far superior.
I don't believe we would've gone to war in Iraq if Gore were in office these last 8 years---and that alone is a vast improvement. Not to mention environmental policy, Justices, gov't regulation, and authoritarian nationalism...
These are not small differences!
But I do have an irrational hatred for the republican animal, and not for Democrats---so I guess I do buy into the whole charade somewhat...
I do appreciate honesty, thanks for it....Now if you can use your inate honesty and basic integrity to join us in our struggle to end the Duopoly.....well, mores the better!
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I don't think Dems want to lose. They embrace right wing policies because they are basically slightly left of center Republicans themselves. They don't represent us, they represent the same powers that be the Pugs represent.
In order for Obama (who desperately wants to win) to get elected he must demonstrate he will faithfully carry out the policies favored by the establishment. These policies including militarism, imperialism and becoming a police state. They want to greatly diminish social programs and the few we'll have will be administered by religious organizations.
It's not that Dems want to lose, it's that they are basically no different from Republicans with a few exceptions like Dennis Kucinch, who has no effect on policy and serves as a fig leaf.
"I have to appreciate the Republicans' offensive moves ! They know Obama's main whine is about racism, so they'll steer completely clear of that . . . "
To expect the Repimplicans to steer clear of racism is like asking an alcoholic to turn down unlimited free drinks at his favorite bar. The Repimps are going to jackhammer Obama on his race. The strategies and code words they employ have yet to be fully revealed. The purpose will be to have every American (not just those of voting age) see Obama as some hip-hopping street thug dressed in baggy pants and a black hoodie with multiple handguns on his person and a copy of "The Invisible Man". The MSM, which desperately wants a McCain victory, will go along with this, employing their own tactics of ladies' and gentlemen's racism. We got a taste of this recently when a typical MSM type, Cokie Roberts, chastised Obama for going on vacation in an "exotic" locale like Hawaii. This after Pat Buchanan attached the same adjective to Obama. As I have absolutely no faith whatsoever in the majority of Americans waking up to what the Repimps have done to them, I expect these strategies to work and Obama to be defeated. And in the year 2012, when Americans will have not just one but two thumbs up their asses and wonder why things are so much worse than they were in 2008, they'll vote for Jeb Bush after a 76 year old McCain retires after one term to spend more time with his family.
I would suggest you are wrong about the race thing. In the first place most Americans don't really care anymore and even if they did they would react negatively to those kind of attacks.
I believe they will go after him where he is most vulnerable. With the best spin in the world he has a paper thin resume and little experience in governing. Supporters may not like it, but thats the truth. ( this can be shunted aside by the fact that you may not need it to lead)
Next they will attack him on his associations. think we have heard the last of Rev. Wright? Father Stupid? Seen the last of the picture of Ayers trampling the American flag underfoot? Meeks? Frank? Chicago Annenberg challenge? Woods foundation? I expect them to go after him hammer and tongs about this stuff.
You must be kidding,right? Perhaps you just dont get out much? Racism is alive and well in this nation, sad to say, and not limited to selected geographic locales either.
However I do agree that, in public at least, the GOP will continue to attack Senator Obama on those vulnerabilities you cite. I wish he hadnt deserted Reverend Wright the way he did though, especially after a twenty odd year association. He should have had the guts to explain to white America the nuances of Black Liberation Theology and the way it seeks to raise up those downtrodden by so many ,many years of slavery, segregation, separatism and inequality.
Further I think that picture of Bill Ayers, taken many decades ago and not at all reflective of his maturation and community service since, is an easily confronted shibboleth as well. All it takes is the courage not to be railroaded by the despicable who use anything and everything to win.
" I much prefer a man who burns the flag and wraps himself in the constitution to one who burns the constitution and wraps himself in the flag." Craig Washington, former Texas State Legislator
It is rather sad to see the state of our political discourse, especially as it tends to bring such as Bush/Cheney to power. If Barack Obama is worthy of your vote then he should have the backbone to stand up and defend his associations in the light of reason and truth. If he runs as did both Gore and Kerry, a bad habit peculiar to democrats it would seem, then he deserves to lose the damn election.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
"You must be kidding,right? Perhaps you just dont get out much? Racism is alive and well in this nation, sad to say, and not limited to selected geographic locales either."
Nope not kidding at all. Racism is nowhere near the problem it used to be. Not for a minute would I suggest that its gone. It will always be here. But in the white community at least in the South and West, its not that big a problem Can't speak for up North. Niot long ago a black guy was posting his experiences in Pittsburg I think it was, describing white flight. Something we had 40 years ago and sure don't now.
I suspect we just disagree on the amount. I would point out that without white votes early on Obama would have been dead in the water. Thatys at least an indicator I'd say.
As a portion of race I'd tell you with no doubt in my mind that black racism far, far outpaces white racism at this point. Though a professor at UT suggested to me that it could easily be class rather than race at this point.
I have to go back and reread BLT to be sure about it.
As to Ayers, no matter what he has done since, I simply don't cotton to terroists. And that is exactly what he and his wife were. No question about it.
I think that flag pic was from 1992, but it won't make any difference when they use it. Its very powerful imagery. Wouldn't you agree?
"It is rather sad to see the state of our political discourse"
Brother do we agree. I'm hoping that Obama and McCain can pull us back up somewhat by just refusing to use personal attacks. I agree if he will stand up and answer these things he can win, run and he will lose. I saw an article, didn't read it, but the premise was..."maybe the Democrats should stop selecting attorney's" There may be a point there.
Be well
Racism is alive and well, in some parts of the uS. On others, it is reduced to a footnote. But, the stats about the primary should tel yu that it is not he main issue on most peoples' minds. The turnout in "almost al white " iowa, was huge for Obama! Even in West Virginia, or Ky. (which many people decried as "evidence of racism among poor whites"--good way to divide us up, right? Then they have us where they want us)only 1 in 5 said that race was a factor in thei rvote. Assuming a few are lying (why??) say, one in 4.To northern people, etc. this may not sound like progress. If you had ben in Appalachia a couple decades aqo--you would say , that means that 75% of "lily white" states (no insult intended to non-racists there)feel race is no longer a big factor. Great? No. Better? Hell yes! He got enormous numbers of voters in states that, 20 yrs ago, would not even have thought about it.That is why it IS historical.We have a ways to go. But to continue to claim that people who are having problems supporting aobama , that it is still based on race, is insulting to most pepole in this country. The GOP talks in code some. Most people ar aware of it, by now.It wont work, with most people. tacking poor whites and minorities against each other is an old tactic , mostly used by conservatives. The prob. with it is, if you call soneone a racist, they can say "Yep so what?" or "I am not!" and youve insulted them. If you blast it at one segment of pop. (ie poor whites), they feel like a target and dont bother to vote. Its just not productive.
Did you miss the "uppity" comment from a Georgia Rep yesterday? That's classic racism, alive and well, as are the "exotic" comments, and to some extent the charge of "elitism."
I'm sick and tired of people acting like being intelligent and well-educated is somehow a negative quality. It smacks of jealousy more than anything else.
It galls me that McCain's speech last night didn't mention the REAL problems facing this country. Just platitudes and happy talk and "Be afraid." How many times did he mention that he was a POW? And just how does that qualify (or disqualify) him as President? Understandably, he didn't mention that he screwed off in college enough that he probably wouldn't have graduated without the family legacy, let alone gotten into Annapolis in the first place. Or that his version of "family values" included dumping his first wife because she wasn't as pretty once she'd had a near fatal car accident while waiting for him to be released?
Frankly, after the last 8 years that have been brought to us by someone who actually IS of the elite class, I'd just like to see someone smart in the WH, someone got there with a top notch education and the grades to prove he actually absorbed something from it. Someone who understands what it means to work hard to achieve goals, and someone who realizes that not everyone has that silver spoon or a rich wife.
As far as the problem of selecting attorneys, just look where W's MBA has gotten us. Maybe if he'd had a better understanding of the law, he wouldn't have had to rely on the likes of John Yoo and Gonzo.
I have an MS (Cum Laude in my BA!) I just dont go around telling everyone all the time and acting like I know what is "best for the masses".Higher ed. is great. I think it should be free (state universities) for everyone who can make it. The problem with constantly boasting about it, is that, everyone who is inthe govt right now is , basically , very well educated! Where has that gotten us? I only lament the constant talk of "the uneducated, unwashed masses" becuase 1)it divides us and 2)it creates "Reaganesque " voters. (Obama complimenting him so much did not help a thing!)Education--good. Using it to help people who need education , rather than crappingon them--PRICELESS!
just look where W's MBA has gotten us. Maybe if he'd had a better understanding of the law, he wouldn't have had to rely on the likes of John Yoo and Gonzo.
Good point. But I'm still convinced the Shrub got his MBA by mailorder.
Bill and Bernie paid the price for their misguided efforts and your continued condemnation of the people they are now is unfair and far too Bush-like for my tastes. I do not know your age, but I am old enough to have been on the front lines of that struggle,along side Pigasis in Chicago in fact, and quite near to Bill and Bernie as well. We all thought revolution imminent and necesary, but what does one expect from twenty somethings? The exemplary way they have both lived their lives since those difficult and challenging times makes your continued condemnations seem rather puzzling, or do you not subscribe to punishment, rehabilitation and forgiveness?
Bill has taught at University of Chicago, has worked with inner city kids and received a commendation for his years of service from Mayor Daley ( hardly a revolutionary himself). I havent seen either of them in almost a decade now but Ill certainly pass on your good wishes when next we correspond.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin