Some say Obama chose a VP already.
Well, maybe it’s time to un-choose.
While this diary resembles my previous di on similar topics, there’s a lot more to say:
JOE BIDEN
1. Biden is a plagiarist. Even if it was 2 decades ago.
Actually, more than a plagiarist; just peep the Wik,
…in September 1987, the campaign ran into serious trouble when he was accused of plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock, then-leader of the British Labour Party. Though Biden had correctly credited the original author in all speeches but one, the one where he failed to make mention of the originator was caught on video. Within days, it was also discovered that, while at Syracuse Law School, Biden had plagiarized a law review article in a class paper he wrote. Biden said the act was inadvertent due to his not knowing the proper rules of citation, and Biden was permitted to retake the course. Further, when questioned by a New Hampshire resident about his grades in law school Biden had claimed falsely to have graduated in the “top half” of his class, when he actually graduated 76th in a class of 85. …
Doesn’t this smell like “the old politics” in its sneakiness?
The minute Biden’s chosen, the Repub meme is, “Great, Dems have some slick-talker at the top of the ticket, and an outright liar and thief at the bottom! That’s Dems for ya, hellooooo John Edwards!!”
2. Biden made a de facto racial slur, or close, about Obama, i.e., the “bright, articulate, and clean” one also at Wik,
…The News Journal…columnist Harry F. Themal….goes on to quote Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen as saying that Biden’s candidacy might be endangered by his “manic-obsessive running of the mouth.” This foreshadowed Biden’s embarrassing gaffe when he commented on fellow Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama. Biden was quoted on January 31, 2007 as saying: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” His comments took second place on Time Magazine’s list of Top 10 Campaign Gaffes for 2007. …
3. No military experience.
4. Etc. (Voted to invade Iraq; MBNA luv; etc.)
I don’t care if Biden says he’s “not the guy”; I want to see that actually happen, his not-the-guy-ness.
EVAN BAYH
1. Hard to distinguish from Hillary Clinton. (See Wik re his voting to invade Iraq, etc.)
1. Name is too much like that of Obama rival John McCain.
2. “Against death penalty”, except in practice; leading to “moral consistency” questions.
3. No military experience.
Especially after being sandbagged at Saddleback, I think Obama is in trouble, campaignwise. If he wants more trouble, he can choose one of the three happy boys above; but why would he want to do that??
Especially after the shellacking McCain gave him last night (in many minds), Barack Obama could use a little toughness on his team. Someone a little like McCain, but without the “ev-l” parts. Kucinich? Edwards? …
Hey, where’s Jim Webb?
I know Webb’s claimed he wasn’t interested in being O’s VP, but “never say never”. He would be especially useful now, for his military hero record, Navy Cross in Vietnam, concern for the economically left-behind, his comfort with the so-called “God and guns” culture, his bluntness and punchiness, etc. etc. etc.
In fact, with his personality and his ease around firearms, doesn’t he remind you a little of some movie toughies?
(courtesy of TheSalmonFarm.org)
Obama/Webb ‘08. You know you want it. Come on. Let it all out.
On the Mel Gibson tip, not only Mad Max is apposite, but maybe even moreso, the racially integrated if hilariously different-from-each other team of Murtaugh and Riggs from the “Lethal Weapon” film series, cf. this poster with the Gib flashing gun from the 2nd LW film,
(courtesy of Wikipedia)
There are so many hilarious similarities, e.g., Obama being the sort of cool, collected one, and Webb the more…”energetic” type, that one suspects Obama/Webb could make the sort of optimum team that Danny Glover/Mel Gibson a.k.a. Murtaugh/Riggs did. (Okay, there are some age and facial hair differences etc., but those aren’t so important)
“Obama/Webb: ‘Lethal Weapon’ for ‘08!” Not only is it amusing, but it could actually work.
If you don’t like it, try on Obama/Daschle for size, and see how that works…
Students in Burma’s universities have been painting red crosses on walls and traffic lights to signal disgust with the country’s ruling junta. But the regime is quick to crush even the slightest hint of resistance.
The red crosses and bursts of color that are now appearing with more and more frequency in the country’s major cities are meant to signal renunciation, disgust and resistance. They are the signs of a new opposition movement known as the “Red Campaign.” Its members, young university students, operate in small groups of no more than five people. They risk everything for their underground struggle against the omnipotent state. …
Red was the color of the hour in September 2007, when tens of thousands of monks, wearing their traditional robes, spent days marching through the streets of Rangoon. The images circled the globe, and the government of General Than Shwe, 75, faltered briefly but then quickly recovered. A wave of arrests and a few killings were the result.
Since then even more fear has prevailed in Burma, and the depth of poverty and suffering among the Burmese has increased since Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The military, with its roughly 400,000 soldiers, did virtually nothing for weeks, inaction for which the sorely afflicted and tolerant Burmese are unlikely to forgive them.
“The government has never been hated as much as it is now,” says Nay Myo Khaing. But can his movement take advantage of popular resentment and turn it into political energy? Khaing seems at a loss, as the monsoon rain drums down onto the corrugated metal roof. Protests are planned for the fall, he says, but everything remains vague. Dissidents like Khaing are hesitant to pin down any plans, not knowing which activists will even be at large then — or whether, once again, their plans will be foiled. …
Ugh.
Keep remembering the Burmese opposition, that’s all I can say. I wonder if our presidential candidates and officials can do more.
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, …
…We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.
, but one wonders what happened to the “rare” part of “safe, legal, and rare”. Bill Clinton invented that–the best thing he ever said–; so if unlike the 2004 platform, the ‘08 platform doesn’t even include “rare”, Dems will look like they’re
less sexually restrained than Bill Clinton.
Is that something the party can afford these days, especially after John Edwards’ zipper problem? Probably not.
–And “We also recognize…” is sort of tepid language, I must say. Again, where’s “rare”? It was there in the ‘04 platform…
Some people are crowing over the disappearance of “rare”, though, cf. Feministe, where, oddly right next to an ad they host from frequent sexual-harassment accusees American Apparel (see my screenshot), someone crows
Not only have they dropped the “safe, legal and rare” bullshit, …
Why is “rare” bullsh-t? Does a desire to make abortions rare make you a Nazi?
And saying abortion should be “rare” is hardly coercive, is it? It may not even be moralistic, it may just be prudential, e.g., abortion is messy, and for that reason alone should be as rare as possible. Differ if you like, but it makes sense to me.
Anyway, maybe partially because I noted “rare” gone in the DNC platform, I put it in the Netroots Platform healthcare section which you all approved or declined to disapprove. (I also put in the section on non-coercion, which might not make the Hillaryites or Edwardsites happy whose candidates were into things like preventing you from being employed if you didn’t purchase health insurance. But some people are not fond of being coerced)
Privacy will include keeping abortion “safe, legal, and rare” (President Bill Clinton) through protecting women’s right to a safe and legal abortion, and facilitating the reduction of abortion through noncoercive means such as family planning, sex education, adoption, maternity leave, parenting classes, and reducing poverty.
[Freedom of Choice. Americans should have freedom of choice among care providers. --This portion between brackets was authored by someone else] They should also be freed from undue burden or coercion by the government, e.g., purchase of health insurance for adults should not be mandated, or made a condition of employment.
(Note: of course, I’m only speaking for myself, not for the other Healthcare Platform writers, who did most of the work and wrote most of the platform–a big shout-out to them!!)
It would be sad if the DNC turns out to be to the “left” of the netroots themselves and can’t even include “rare” in the platform…
…The slightest drop in the faith-based vote could very well spell the difference between victory and defeat in several key battleground states on Election Day.
So will faith and values play a key role in determining the next occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.? Absolutely. …
This Rick Warren civil forum with Barack and McCain is going to be interesting, isn’t it??
–Now, who’s going to vote against Obama just because he includes “rare” in the platform? Again, it was in the 2004 platform,
At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
…A last note, on another “morally-related topic”. Let’s just say Obama forgives James Dobson for the “rain out Obama” thing that one Dobsonite briefly advocated, and endorses or signs a version of Dob’s letter asking that Marriott hotels drop pornography. –Would people vote against him because of that? Just wondering. (Note that such an initiative isn’t censorship or a denial of anyone’s free speech rights; it’s just a use of those free speech rights by people who don’t like pornography…porno being the kind of phenomenon that helps break up marriages.
And I’m not going to mention John Edwards again.)
Many people like family values; and guess what, they vote for those who openly espouse them. Think about it.
That’s it for today. Opine about the usefulness or horrorness of including “rare” in the platform, or the badness or goodness (!!) of porno, or whatever. It’s your right.
Brief post today, sort of do-it-yourself: check out “Obama haiku” on Google, look around there a while.
(The following haiku by Cheryl Russell is especially poignantish, click here.)
For our first lengthy interview (as opposed to short ones) here at Obamaism.org, we have the honor to feature Professor R. L’Heureux Lewis from the Department of Sociology and the Black Studies Program at the City College of New York, City University of New York (”CCNY-CUNY”), seen in his “hmmm” pose below,
Professor Lewis has been on “The O’Reilly Factor” discussing Jeremiah Wright, cf. this YouTube of that 3/18/08 event, and has also appeared in other media contexts such as Lynn Doyle’s “It’s Your Call” talk show and Jesse Jackson’s “Keep Hope Alive” radio show, among many others. He has several of his own blogs/sites, including the late great Black at Michigan, and more recently, UptownNotes and ProfessorLewis.com. You can’t say he knows nothing about the media…
Following are my four questions and his answers:
1. Q: Recently, Barack Obama was heckled in Florida, and protesters’ signs said “What about the black community Obama?”: do they have a legitimate complaint? How or how not?
A: I don’t even want to call the folks “hecklers” because hecklers insinuates they’re there to joke and make fun. I think they had a legitimate set of questions about Obama and the ways in which he has done everything to not address Black people in particular. Besides Obama’s initial stammering, his answer began to address and respond to their concerns, but in a real cursory way. When he said he was the first presidental candidate to say what happened to Sean Bell was wrong he neglects to mention 1) In a presidential race full of folks scared to take a stand that being first amongst cowards isn’t hard to do and 2) that in the wake of the Sean Bell verdict he basically said, “The court has spoken. Now ya’ll don’t go out and tear nothing up.” For a president who can go to Latino communities and talk about pathways to citizenship, and to Jewish communities and talk about Israel’s defense, why when he comes to Black communities do we get admonished for not being fathers?
2. Q: In a somewhat similar vein: Obama has also recently shown little support for an apology for slavery, or for reparations for slavery. Is this right for him to do? or is it something he should reconsider after he’s elected President?
A: Obama supporting reparations is about as likely as the Phillies winning a World Series. It could happen, but the odds are ridiculously against it. While a serious inquiry into reparations would be great, Obama is not going to be the person to take up the mantle for it. While Obama is of African descent, he likely doesn’t have the same investment in inquiring about the long-term effects of American slavery. That’s not to say he isn’t concerned about Black folks at large, he just isn’t going to begin a conversation about arguably the most contentious race-related issue when he’s trying to get in the door or even after he’s in the door. The grassroots are going to have to push him to even think about reparations, affirmative action, or any form of policy that is meant to address historical wrongs (and yes, I know the court’s most recent rationale around affirmative action isn’t about past wrongdoing, but I can read history and I know the roots of affirmative action).
3. Q: Do your own views of Obama vary as you wear either, first, your sociologist hat, or second, your Black Studies hat? Or are they blended together so much it doesn’t make a difference?
A: Well, I’m a Black Sociologist, so does that count as a third category? As a sociologist, I’m really interested in the energy his campaign has developed among young people, across race and social class. While it’s not perfect, it’s certainly something we haven’t seen in my lifetime. The Black Sociologist, though, wonders, how likely is it that the interests of Black folks will get lost in a sea of energy. If the primary season is any indicator, we’re in for some trouble! My Black Studies hat asks about the ways in which Obama could potentially change the US’ international face particularly around diplomacy and development. In travelling overseas, the energy I’ve felt from folks throughout the African Diaspora is full of hope. There is a lot to be excited about by his campaign and these feelings of hope for change, but change is one of the first things to go when politicians get into office. That is, unless you’re Republican, then you just come in and wreck shop!
4. Q: Word on the street is that you are a martial arts practitioner. What informative martial arts analogies can you make about Barack Obama and his ideas and campaign? (I’ve seen comical Photoshop pictures of Obama with nunchuks, etc., so people think about these things)
A: As a practicing Martial Artist, I think Barack should remain balanced but also let his fire energy come out. He’s a little too balanced right now, a little too earth, he should be like water. As calm as a lake when it comes to politically contentious issues. As receiving as an ocean when it comes to hearing new ideas. And as devastating as a tidal wave when it comes to responding to McCain’s attacks. Oh yeah, and make sure he makes Sho’nuff
(courtesy of 100Grana.com)
his Secretary of Defense.
- - -
Well, that was an interview: not only policy and political issues, but Sho’nuff and fire energy! and complete with photgraphs!!
Thanks, Professor Lewis! His interview shows that academia doesn’t have to be boring, after all…..
I’d long been thinking of writing something about Angelina Jolie, and her not-so-great side, but her own terrible judgment has preempted me here: see Variety offshoot “Wilshire and Washington” today, Angelina Jolie’s Endorsement,
…both campaigns are well aware of one star who stands out among the undecideds: Angelina Jolie.
Both campaigns have reached out to her, apparently to court her support. …
…after her trip to Iraq, …she wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post, “Staying to Help in Iraq,” in which she argued that the U.S. should step up financial and material assistance to Iraq — not withdraw from its commitment in the region.
She wrote, “My visit left me even more deeply convinced that we not only have a moral obligation to help displaced Iraqi families, but also a serious, long-term, national security interest in ending this crisis.
“Today’s humanitarian crisis in Iraq — and the potential consequences for our national security — are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won’t explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder?”
“What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made.”
She did, however, “call on each of the presidential candidates and congressional leaders to announce a comprehensive refugee plan with a specific timeline and budget as part of their Iraq strategy.”
Her call for a continued U.S. presence left some conservative blogs buzzing that Jolie may in fact endorse McCain — after some had just assumed that she would back Obama.
Jolie has said very little about the presidential race since.
In June, when Entertainment Weekly asked her whether she talked politics with Clint Eastwood, a longtime Republican, on the set of the upcoming movie, “The Changeling,” she said, “Actually, we don’t disagree as much as you’d think. I think people assume I’m a Democrat. But I’m registered independent and I’m still undecided. So I’m looking at McCain as well as Obama.”
Jolie’s father, Jon Voight, has endorsed McCain and recently wrote an op-ed for the Washington Times highly critical of Obama.
I don’t think I even need to say anything here. (Though I’ll note that she’s able-bodied enough to join the U.S. armed forces, and risk her own life, instead of committing other people to stay in Iraq, and to risk their lives, just maybe to give an exciting background to her “humanitarian tours” and her narcissism) Your comments are welcome, though.
The beloved Bernie’s death has already been diaried (at Daily Kos), but one interesting feature of his life to note is that Barack Obama recently criticized him for his “un-family values” jokery: see ABC, “Political Radar”, Bernie Mac Makes ‘Inappropriate’ Jokes at Obama Fundraiser,
…Mac introduced Obama for the $2,300-a-head fundraiser at the Hyatt Regency in downtown Chicago and opened with his typical humor.
“My little nephew came to me and he said, ‘Uncle, what’s the difference between a hypothetical question and a realistic question?’” Mac told the crowd, “I said, ‘I don’t know,’ but I said, ‘I’ll tell you what you do. Go upstairs and ask your mother if she’d make love to the mailman for $50,000.’”
The joke continued with the mother saying she’d sleep “with anyone” for $50,000 — and then continuing to include Mac’s daughter hypothetically answering the question in the same way.
“Hypothetically speaking, we should have $100,000. But realistically speaking we live with two hos,” Mac said delivering the punch line that solicited a few hecklers in the political crowd.
“It’s not funny. Let’s get Barack on,” someone shouted from the crowd.
Mac introduced Obama shortly after, and Obama called him a “great friend.”
Near the end of Obama’s remarks, the Illinois Senator included a rebuke of his comedian friend in a regular stump speech riff about divisions that still exist in America.
“We can’t afford to be divided by race. We can’t afford to be divided by religion, or by region or class. Or by gender. That means, by the way, Bernie you got to clean up your act. This is a family affair. … I’m just messing with you,” Obama said.
The Obama campaign was equally quick to distance themselves from Mac’s off-color comments, with Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki saying, “Sen. Obama told Bernie Mac that he doesn’t condone these statements and believes what was said was inappropriate.”
Of course, not only the ‘rack and I have problems with people’s naughty behavior, espec. as it reflects on DEMOCRATS, cf. that self-admitted “sickening scold” (!!) Meteor Blades throwing meteoric flames over the self-confessed adulterer/liar John Edwards in his post Another Comment from a ‘Sickening Scold’,
In any case, as we mourn a great comedian (I’ll never forget those eyes popping out of his head), we can also consider how Obama and others can do good for the country, and for their campaigns, by standing up for “family values”, even if they have to criticize entertainers or others–including politicians, either Dem or Repub.
All right, I don’t know that he reads Obamaism.org, though his staff know about it. (I may have told them in person about it, in fact)
I’m not going to embed O’s Olympic “Hands” vid on my site, since I have fear of too much Intertubes technology etc.; but you can check it on the BO site here.
For those not into clicking vid links, the video shows average Americans making the world better through making more green jobs etc., per Barack’s plan. And Ob appears himself near the end, though not super-obtrusively. (Showing he’s not just some Berlin cabaret type, you know, some Joel Grey who wants to be in the Oval Office)
Anyway, even if my post title is a little unprovable (depending on the implications of “someone”), I did talk recently about showcasing American excellence rather than just Obaman glitter in his Olympic commercial(s): and he did that! So, “great minds” thinking alike, or my making an accurate forecast of what his videographers would do, etc.
Enjoy!
