Yes, I know that when you speak in public, you often misplace phrases in a sentence’s proper order and lack the necessary visual aid of punctuation to get your point across as intended. And yes, I am sure that is what happened to Hillary yesterday when she was complaining about Obama’s analysis of her health care plan. She said,
[Obama] is attacking me … because I cover everyone with more misleading information.
I am sure she didn’t mean that her plan’s coverage is misleading.
Filed under Digressions, Obama 08
Candidates cannot be everywhere (and often cannot stoop too low into the nasty mud slinging), so they need surrogates on the war path for them. Nevertheless, everyone should know their place. There is a reason why politicians do the talking and the strategists do the strategizing. Politicans are communicators, strategists are not (necessarily). Strategists plan, politicians execute the plan.
That was more than evident on yesterday’s Meet the Press where both Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod and Clinton’s Geoff Garin were horrendously pathetic. Not only were they so much worse to look at than Obama and Hillary, they both lacked the public speaking skills necessary to effectively get their bosses’ points across in a non-destructive manner. I don’t doubt their intelligence and worth to their respective campaigns, but as “visible” advocates, they were about as eloquent as a George W. Bush speech. The net result made both candidates look bad. Continue reading
Between ABC News’ choice of debate questions and Billary’s “anything goes” tactics, I really believe that the state of hypocrisy in American politics and the media has reached new heights. If Obama has brought in a whole new generation of voters “who can believe” in the country, the press’ need to keep this race alive combined with Hillary and the Republicans’ absurd allegations against Obama will only leave the nation desolate and hopeless. No matter how naive you believe that Obama’s “Yes We Can” message may be, a “no you can’t” response helps no one.
On Friday’s The Bill Moyers Journal, Bill Moyers began by pointing out that
You knew it was going to be a dismal night this Wednesday when just a few minutes into the debate, ABC interrupted the candidates for a long commercial break — the first of many. By the time it was over, the audience had had enough.
Makes you think that if Lincoln and Douglas were around, they’d be sandwiched between a Viagra ad and Victoria’s secret. In a real debate the candidates would face each other on the stage with no one but a timekeeper to enforce the clock. As it is, these ‘debates’ are commercially-staged press conferences about as connected to reality as an Elvis Presley sighting.
The Washington Post’s Tom Shales called the affair “shoddy” and “despicable.” Greg Mitchell of EDITOR AND PUBLISHER said it was “perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years.” And the historian and writer Eric Alterman said: “I don’t like to speculate on people’s motives. Just why ABC thinks that a presidential ‘debate’ should entirely ignore health care, environmental issues, science policy, our over-stretched and under-resourced military, an epidemic of people losing their homes, the bailing out of mega-banks, and our disappearing civil liberties… is a mystery to me.
Sadly, as the fantasy-inducing commercials and journalistic narcissism built through the evening, the most damning indictment of all came from facts on the ground, otherwise known as reality.
Just this week Iraq was struck by a fresh wave of violence. At least 50 people died from a bombing at a funeral – a funeral! Sixty people were killed earlier in the week, and 120 wounded.
It’s difficult … but gruesome news doesn’t go away because we look away . . .
In today’s New York Times, Frank Rich has written one of the best commentaries to date on the this season’s hypocrisy: Continue reading
Here is a fantastic article by Jeffrey Feldman in the Huffington Post about the disgraceful performance of George Stephanopoulos and ABC News during Wednesday night’s debate. Why Stephanopoulos went so low into the gutter is anyone’s guess — loyalty to the Clinton’s, to keep the elections alive and people tuned in, or because Corporate America is in bed with Hillary as ReWrite believes?
Nevertheless, asking about the Weather Undeground was freakishly inappropriate and says something incredibly disturbing about U.S. politics and the media. Feldman writes,
Last night this violent framing took on a new and disturbing dimension when George Stephanopoulos, co-moderator of ABC’s candidate debate, asked a series of questions insinuating that Barack Obama may be politically aligned with a radical group called The Weatherman Underground–a 1960s violent political organization responsible for the bombing of federal buildings:
A gentleman named William Ayers, he was part of the Weather underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol and other buildings. He’s never apologized for that. And in fact, on 9/11 he was quoted in The New York Times saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.” An early organizing meeting for your state was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won’t be a problem?
(George Stephanopoulos, Apr 16, 2008)
Of course, it is patently absurd to believe that Barack Obama or any candidate for President in either party has political allegiance to 1960s [sic] group of domestic terrorists. But the truth in this situation did count for much, unfortunately. Stephanopoulos [sic] question was the type of media stink bomb that fouls a candidate in the asking. Obama’s answer, no matter how quick or good, could not have changed the outcome.
On the surface, Stephanopoulos’ questions seems to be about ‘patriotism,’ the supposed organizing theme for that particular round of questions. In fact, it was not about patriotism at all, but was a trap. The question tried to put Obama in a situation where he felt the need to repudiate his connection with a man associated with political violence in the 1970s. Obama responded not by taking the debate, but by showing what was at stake when questions like Stephanopoulos’ are allowed to stand unchallenged . . .
Check out the entire article: Continue reading
Last night’s debate was absurd and one sided, as ReWrite correctly points out. Laila Lalami sums it up pretty well by as having been “Upside Down“:
Four million people have been displaced in Iraq, as many as a hundred and fifty thousand have been killed, food prices are causing riots around the world, the economy is in the can, crude oil is at $115 a barrel, and what do talking heads want to know? Why Obama doesn’t wear a flag pin on his lapel.
Hillary went so far as admitting that she can’t win by acknowledging that there was a reason why she was “still in the race”. What she didn’t explain after saying that she would not have chosen Jeremiah Wright as her pastor was why, on the other hand, she did hire Mark Penn as her Senior Campaign Strategist — the lobbyist who has represented Blackwater and Colombia.
It’s all getting just too silly. Why Obama was drilled for knowing a Clinton pardonee or about his relationship to the flag is anyone’s guess. I guess Carville accusing Bill Richardson last month of being a Judas must have really scared George. Continue reading
Last week while reading Unburnable, I felt some nostalgia for my Bob Marley days. When I was a kid between the ages of maybe 14 and 16, I was obsessed with Bob Marley, Reggae music and Rastafarian culture — though unlike Bill Clinton, the reason I didn’t inhale was because I wasn’t smoking.
Over time, I kind of lost my Bob Marley enthusiasm for a series of reasons. I even wrote a tongue-and-cheek criticism, for the sake of argument, about white people who assume the Rasta look. It was amazing to see how many people fell for the trap and responded angrily. Every once in a while I still put on some of my old Reggae albums by artists like Burning Spear, Joe Higgs, Ras Michael and the Sons of Negus, Jacob Miller, Ijahman Levi, and others that I had lived off of in my adolecence.
And whenever I revisit Bob Marley, I am always more than impressed by the depth his music. All of his music can be summed up by the lines from “Trench Town Rock” that reads, “one good thing about music is that when it hurts you feel no pain.” Continue reading
Filed under Digressions
It is now generally accepted that Hillary only chance left is to pull a coup by negativity. She has to convince the Super Delegates that Obama cannot win in November. Sometimes this is done by directly attacking his persona and other times by spinning the reality on the ground — to pretend that she actually has a chance other than the back door. The fact of the matter is that Obama is beating and continues to beat Hillary regardless of negative attacks against him.
The irony is that nothing she does can really make a difference in terms of the way people are voting. The voters have been incredibly predictable since Super Tuesday. Hillary has won the states that she was predicted to win, and Obama has won the states he was predicted to win. The only real difference between the original predictions and the results has been how much Obama has reduced her leads in her states. For example, when Hillary is predicted to win big in a state, Obama almost always reduces that lead significantly and thus gains so many delegates that Hillary’s victory is almost unnoticeable in real terms.
Hillary would like us all to believe this isn’t happening. She was leading by double digits in Pennsylvania, but now her spinsters want us to think it will be a close race. That way they can call it a comeback. In reality, there is no comeback. Obama has caught up. The press also wants us to think that each race is up for grabs and extremely close. The only reason this race is still going is because the press needs us to keep tuned. Continue reading
So there I was — just seconds ago — when I ran across a headline that read, “Supreme Court upholds Kentucky’s use of lethal injections“. My first reaction was to read the headline out loud, so as to evoke a response from my fellow co-worker Joan (who completely ignored me, by the way).
Just the other day, Joan and I were discussing the difference between euthanasia and the right to reject medical assistance. For some reason, I immediately thought that the headline referred to euthanasia rather than capital punishment.
Upon catching my error, I realized that I was finally losing my mental agility, that I was going soft and should immediately refrain from anything remotely resembling multi-tasking. Then I thought about it again. Why was I confused? Maybe I am not losing my mind. What is the difference between assisted suicide by lethal injection and capital punishment by lethal injection?
Both involve the taking of one person’s life by a third party. The difference with assisted suicide is that there is consent and the act is performed below the radar of the law. The difference with capital punishment is that the act is performed by the law.
Filed under Digressions, Essays
As I have mentioned, Hillary and the Republicans have tried to paint Obama as everything from a radical Black Panther to an elitist. And even at the Associated Press’ annual luncheon in Washington, DC — Dean Singleton, board chair of the Associated Press, mistakenly called Osama Bin Laden, “Obama Bin Laden” while asking Obama a question. Obama graciously corrected the “error”.
Here’s a great Tom Toles Cartoon from the Washington Post. Ironically, no matter how Hillary paints Obama, she is still not gaining much ground as her trustworthiness erodes away — the majority of Americans find her dishonest.
Filed under Obama 08
Grave Error 