Statewide, the Democrats enjoy a registration advantage of nearly 660,000 voters out of 11.2 million, up from a lead of about 370,000 voters in 2004.
From the news story in the Los Angeles Times, Barack Obama turns rivals' words on them in Florida, we see that this is the year we can finely get Florida back to voting on issues in a way that will actually help their ailing economy.
There are a lot of great Democrats that live there and a lot of great Republicans -- great because there care about their country deeply. In the VFW halls, in the retirement communities, in the communities that serve the tourism community as well as the export industries -- you see their patriotism on display.
My Dad and Step-mom used to live in Bradenton, at Golf Lakes Estates -- a community of around 640 retired families, many of them snowbirds from Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania -- and that's where I went for his memorial service. I'll never forget the turnout from that community which he dearly loved. Because he was a veteran, and the Chaplain of the Department of Florida in the VFW, the local VFW veteran's honored him with a truly uplifting memorial service.
Many of those veteran's might be supporting John McCain today, yet I imagine even more will be supporting Barack Obama because they are aware of how John McCain has not really fought for Veteran's after they returned home. In fact, Barack Obama has been a greater champion of their causes because of the level of commitment he not only articulates but has offered in legislative efforts.
There are many resources online that point highlight his action over John McCain's bluster. I could find them and post them here if anyone doubts this is true. Just send me an email.
The point is, in 2000, Al Gore lost the Florida vote by 537 votes, though each candidate received over 2.9 million votes. This is the election when we can turn that around, because the Dems have over 600,000 more registered voters.
However, because of that advantage, there may be a tendency to stay at home on election day and just assume that registration advantage will automagically turn into a voting result advantage. I pray no one will be caught holding those feelings. Every registered Democrat needs to get out and vote this time around. And rather than wait until election day, vote early! This is a time when we need all hands on deck. And, if we have that kind of turnout, America will have a better day on the morning of November 5th.
That will be a great day in America and all the retirees in Manatee County will sing their songs on Sunday morning just a little louder; they can hold their heads a little higher, because Florida exercised the power of their vote and redeeming their state for the Great Statesman from Illinois -- to become the first mixed race President of the United States.
Glory Hallelujah!
McCain calls Lewis remarks 'outrageous'
Well, surprise, surprise, surprise, Senator John McCain -- words actually do mean something. The idea that "Barack just had a few words in a speech" (as stated by Hillary Clinton during the primary) when she was contrasting her credentials, and the extensive experience of John McCain and herself to Barack's "words", discounted their importance, at her own peril. Now it looks like you're going to follow suit? Shame on you.
While Senator Obama was building this movement for change, he did use words and certainly he should know by now that words are every bit as powerful as weapons.
Or does he? Apparently not. Then I say that for a 72-year old, he's rather naive.
So, while John McCain has begun discounting the importance of his own words, here in the Obama camp we've been offended for month. Apparently, the John Lewis camp has has become offended by them, too.
Not only because they are something we don't care to hear, just because we like our guy better; no we're offended by them because we know they can be incendiary to those who love to hate, or may enjoy having the flames of racism fanned because it makes them feel superiority over the less powerful.
The woman who thought Barack was a Muslim, and you took the microphone and said, "No, he's not. He's a Christian and good family man" (paraphrased); why wasn't that stressed a lot more months ago, every time one of those hate mail messages was sent? Why do you allow your supporters to pound on Barack because of his middle name, as though it's some kind of sin to be named Hussein? For that matter, why does it even matter if he's a Muslim, though for the life of me, I cannot fathom why people continue to insist that he is.
Personally, I don't believe John Lewis' remarks are outrageous, at all. He's been on the receiving end of racist comments for decades, as have all people of color. Until you walk a few miles in his shoes, and in the shoes of Barack Obama, I think you'd be much better off just telling your staff and supporters to cool it with the attacks.
Even this "Palling around with Terrorists" mantra that Governor Palin has been espousing lately is incendiary. You would do well to remind voters that it was President Nixon who was impeached during this time, while the charges against William Ayers were dropped. Nixon's indirect role in the deaths of four students at Kent State, brought about because he was lying to the American public that he was NOT bombing Cambodia -- this was just the tipping point that lead to the end of this horrific war. I think you'd be wise just to drop this linking of Obama to Ayers, but, it's your campaign -- do as you wish.
President's would do well to remember it not nice to lie to the voting public, nor is it nice to make fun of community organizers, especially when the community Barack is organizing is the entire United States, which includes over 125,000,000 people who will vote on November 4th!
Words are very powerful, often more powerful than guns, though you military guys tend to forget that. I believe that's the reason you and George discount the importance of diplomacy, and of talking with your enemies. It's a tough lesson to learn, but learn it you must, apparently the hard way -- and from someone who has some insight you may soon learn to respect.
It's unfortunate, but you and your surrogates heckling the importance of being a community organizer as opposed to being a mayor -- well, it's just not a good idea to heckle anyone even if you are Rudy Guiliani. As I recall, Guiliani finished 5th in Iowa while Barack finished first. Where does Rudy Guiliani get off poking fun at anyone who has run a national campaign and become their parties nominee?
A little something I learned from my mother, and I think Barack learned it from his, as well. Just don't engage in the heckling of others -- you don't build friendships but instead build enemies, or you just come off looking uncultured. I know that's not a big goal of yours, but since you're running for President, a little diplomacy could go a long way.
Not that we want you to change, actually. We here in the Obama camp are looking forward to a landslide victory. 341-197, at a minimum. You could call that forecast "outrageous" but I would say, "It doesn't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind is going to blow".
From the NYTimes. Beyond Ideology, a Generational Clash
“At the time when the war started,” he said, “you said it was going to be quick and easy. You said we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. You were wrong. You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shia and Sunni, and you were wrong.”
This was one of Barack's better moments last night. I agree with Mark Halperin and the CBS Poll results; Obama A-, McCain B-
In between Wednesday morning and Friday night, we were treated to a glimpse of what a McCain Presidency might look like -- reckless, aloof (he didn't even look at Barack once, that I could see), and he apparently needed a lot of notes on his podium. I don't know how many Barack had, since C-Span only showed the McCain coming to pick up the notes, but I wish the Presidential Debate Commission would simply provide blank paper and a pen. That's all they should get, IMO.
While Barack seemed willing to "reach across the isle" with his many references to when John McCain was correct on some point, he was also able to balance this with instances when he was very wrong.
McCain needed a zinger but unfortunately for his campaign, the best line of the night, the one above, was directed at him and it was a good line.
Barack looked very Presidential. Was it just me or did it seem like the longer the debate when on, the more frazelled Sen. McCain became. It's like he was just wanting this young upstart Obama to go away and leave him alone.
He kept semi-insulting him with that old line from the elderly they use whenever they can't come up with a good argument --
"Mr. McCain, 72, repeatedly argued that Mr. Obama, who is 47, was not ready for the job: “I’m afraid Senator Obama doesn’t understand” and “What Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand” and “Senator Obama still doesn’t understand.”
John Podhoretz over at CommentaryMagazine.com wrote in his post Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Pundits the following:
"The only people on earth who are actually damaged by such a postponement are the staff of Ole Miss, where it is to take place, and the Commission on Presidential Debates, which sat around for months trying to pick just the right dates".
"Which sat around for months trying to pick just the right dates?" and "Honestly, what exactly is the big deal?"
Surely you jest, Mr. Podhoretz.
The McCain campaign woke up Wednesday morning to some very bad news. The Washington Post poll was showing him down 9-pts, in the national race (of which there is none. That race means almost nothing, except we like to track these numbers like handicapping “the economy” another emorphous noun like "the race" -- no, there are 51+ plus races, but I digress).
They’ve seen 3-pts up and 3-pts down for so long but this was a real zinger. It caught the whole campaign off guard -- a blow to the stomach in a prize fight — not going to take you out but certainly the wind was knocked out of them.
So, the team mustered up. They turned over the eight ball to see, "Throw another Hail Palin".
One maverick dash of inspiration later; “We’ve got to get back in the limelight! Our star is falling faster than an Obama Republican’s wish! Our post-RNC bounce has disintegrated. We need thunder and lightning!"
The Maverick steps into the room, sizes up the situation, opens his mouth and proclaims, “Leave the field. Let's just leave the field, now. We’ll call the game on the economic crisis, forget the 5-6 million that Ol' Mississippi has invested in getting ready for the Debate and we'll just shake things up. Let's call W, we'll head back to Washington. I wave a magic wand that erases my 20-years of being against government regulation and voila -- back on top".
Unfortunately, after he called his little summit meeting, he discovered that he has not distanced himself enough from Bush. His own Party is ready to sabotage the efforts of both Bush and McCain. Two days before the debate, his campaign has chosen the Jessie James grand finale approach; “If we can’t win, we're going down in a blaze of glory”!!!
It’s all over but the shouting for Senator McCain and his maverick protege, Gov. Palin. Soon he'll proclaim, “But I’ve always been a maverick who storms in to save the day! Nevermind that I’m better suited to be an Admiral than a President, I’m deserving! So what if I’ve put 100,000,000 debate enthusiasts — the vast majority of those who would choose to be the informed electorate -- on hold! And, I’m sorry I have so many houses and cars that I can’t count them all, but I really can relate to the middle class! Really, I can!!!
Set, game, match — Obama-Biden 341 vs. McCain-Palin 197 (or should it be Palin-McCain).
Ha ha ha ha. Just kidding. A ploy, like John McCain's most recent stunt.
John McCain is using this moment of crisis as a political ploy to try to avoid the debates. 100,000,000 Americans are poised to watch this event. It's the contest so many of us have been waiting for on Friday night but he wants to hang out in Washington where he feels a lot safer, among his cronies.
So now we have Gov. Sarah Palin, who has only been briefly vetted in three interviews since nomination, being followed up by her would-be sole boss wanting to delay a scheduled debate? Does he have any idea how much effort goes into planning one of those events? I imagine he does to some extent, but how this will play out with the Independents who were "leaning McCain" will be interesting to observe. I suppose many will just keep "leaning" because to them, he can do no wrong -- kind of like me with Sen. Obama!!!
I become more and more impressed with Senator Obama with every passing day. The opposition can attack him all they want, but to me, he is one of the most reasoned candidates I've watched (even come to know a little bit, from all the events I've attended, times I've shaken his hand and even been privileged to have personal questions answered) during the last 40 years -- since JFK, actually.
I actually kind of liked Reagan, too -- made the mistake of voting for him and his policies help destroy my real estate investment portfolio -- but we learn over time which party really is sticking up for the middle-class.
Anyhow, I'll not belabor the "let's privatize Social Security" argument. Let's hope it's another 50-years before some politician brings that up seriously again.
Stop the drama, just vote Obama.
I really don't know all that much about Gov. Palin. I, like probably 99% of us, wasn't introduced to her until John McCain picked her as his replacement at the top of the ticket -- just kidding, I know he picked her for VP nominee but you'd hardly know it from the sensationalism surrounding his choice.
The lack of media interviews is distressing to me, but stories like this one http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2000/05/23/news.txt confirm that this political manuever has not received nearly enough vetting.
Never mind Sarah Palin -- that she is a woman -- I don't care about her gender one iota. I wouldn't care whether she was black, white, hispanic, Asian or an Eskimo, a man, woman, crossgendered, gay, whatever -- all I care about is whether she is adequately qualified to be the President, should something happen to the only person to whom she answers in the Executive Branch. Sen. McCain picked her as the BEST-QUALIFIED to succeed him, should he be involuntarily forced to relinguish the post, thorough natural or unnatural means. Really Senator McCain? You surveyed the entire field of Republican alternatives and Sarah Palin was your best choice?
For the last decade, I've arguing been very strongly that what this country needs is a woman to become President -- that the world needs a LOT more women in charge! Ask my wife and she'll attest to my honesty on this position. I even quit an executive breakfast club, which I had belonged to for over four years, because the "good ol' boys" couldn't quit making jokes about woman and minorities. I hate prejudice so much that I've become prejudiced against prejudice, that's how non-prejudicial I have become!
It's the character, the intellectual prowess, the requisite skill set required of the position of POTUS that is all I care about. And, on this account, what I'm reading lately about Gov. Palin greatly concerns me.
I hope the debates allow Barack Obama to overcome the 6% of American's who seem hell bent on hanging onto their racial prejudices because there is no excuse that he should have to be that much better just to overcome the idiocy of prejudice. For their VP picks, Biden is so vastly superior to Gov. Palin that there isn't even a legitimate contest. Testimonies like the one referenced in this article confirm that for me. IMO, she is governor because of the outrageous corruption of her own party and chosen primarily because she was the lesser of two evils among the available choices. Sure she has some strengths, but to be President, or Vice-President, don't you think the media should be allowed to vet her? And when we dig deeper, what do we find? Stories like this one.
Palin-McCain -- not right for Republicans', not right for American. Just vote Obama-Biden and let's get this country headed back to a position of leadership in the world, instead of one of disgrace.
Sarah Palin and John McCain - Both "Energetically Wrong".
It's so easy to toss out statements, intended to make an audience believe you're up on your knowledge about an issue, but when there isn't a chance for rebuttal, the speaker can get away with distorting the facts. They may not be outright lieing, yet will they ever come back to the venue there were on when they asserted these claims, and offer a correction? Better yet, will they confess that they are simply pandering for votes through manipulating the data to promote their agenda -- not on your life!
Palin-McCain -- Wrong on Energy, wrong for America.
When Republican John McCain speaks of change, what he is talking about is he wants to change only the leadership, not the direction in which we're headed. Repubs are 100% happy with the direction and think everyone else should be, too!
If you don't believe that, watch Bill Maher's Real Time interview in which John Fund was given so much leeway to monopolize the conversation while Janeane Garofalo and Salman Rusdie had to fight to get a word in edgewise.
What a bigot. He's the problem and represents what's wrong with America. If you can't advance a plausible solution to a challenging issue, just talk louder and hog all the available time, make outlandish statements then don't allow time for rebuttal. Just claim everything is black and white, like George Bush does and use boistrous bluster instead of brilliance to advance your argument.
I would have loved to hear a LOT more from Salman Rushdi and a lot less from John Fund. Anyone who believes in the idea that there is no "gray" -- that you're either with us or you're against us -- sees the world through black and white glasses, denying the existence of alternative, plausible viewpoints. To say there is only black and white is to play God, which is what Republicans love to do.
By claiming "God sent us to Iraq", Sarah Palin uses the same bigotted logic which Osama bin Laden did when he had people fly planes into the WTC's. Committing henious crimes which destroy the lives of innocent people as "collateral damage" in one's cause, then to ask for redemption because your mission is "holy", is criminal! But Republicans don't believe in justice -- they just want to have their own way!
The argument that John Fund advances -- to have one fox (who destroyed the chicken coop during the last eight years) be replaced by another fox who'll do the same, i.e. lie to us all the while smiling and shaking his head affirmatively -- is ludicrous nonsense.
Obama would not only bring change, he would bring PROGRESS. Most people are 100% for progress and 1000% percent against change. I think its time to promote PROGRESS, not just change, now that McCain-Palin have stolen the mantra.
Obama represents the progress that only change can bring, but many old timers like the way things are; they feel secure. "What would happen if the government changed things? I might not like the outcome", so they vote for "security". Time to change the slogan, Barack.
Obama-Biden - Vote for Progress, Now!
A good read, by Andrew Hacker -- Obama: The Price of Being Black
I have to admit, the historic nature of Obama's candidacy seems to be receiving a lot less media attention than McCain's VP pick. While I respect the fact that having a woman as a VP pick is also historic, I'm more than a little disappointed by the press.
With Olbermann and Matthews being demoted at MSNBC, and Tim Russert's passing, who is going to be responsible for vetting this Palin? We know who was responsible for vetting Obama -- Hillary Clinton and the whole right-wing attack machine. But is Governor Palin being subjected to anywhere near the scrutiny she should be, since John McCain has a much higher probability of exiting the planet early.
Issues like voters having to have government issued photo-ID cards and spot checks for felons that may very well disenfranchise voters seems to loom large for infringement of voter rights. But, if people don't get out to vote in a few of their local elections, waiting to get registered just for the Presidential election, I imagine they could have a rude awakening on Nov. 4th. Best plan is to vote earlier than Nov. 4th, if at all possible, or to make sure you have a voter registration card.
There are enough stumbling blocks to trip up an Obama Presidency but fortunately, we shall overcome.
Obama-Biden '08!!!
The questions are flying, about whether Governor Sarah Palin would be ready to lead the country,on day one, if something should happen to John McSame.
Apparently, the McCain campaign thinks two months of prepping ought to be adequate to prepare someone for the vice-presidency. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13323.html
People who would vote for the McSame/Palin ticket, with ALL of these Bush-Cheney staffers involved in the campaign can't possibly be thinking they are voting for "change", can they?
They can't possibly think the American public is that stupid, can they?
Apparently so. With Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney available as VP choices, why wouldn't McCain have chosen one of them? I guess these guys wouldn't be quite as much fun to hug, even though they likely would have been a lot better-qualified.
I'm so glad Barack Obama chose Joe Biden. I just hope that after the hoola-hoop fad that is Sarah Palin stalls a bit, we'll get back to discussing the challenging issues that face this country.
When a Presidential nominee chooses a running mate, they are showing us how they will govern. As the largest free market economy for over a century, decisions made by Presidents have great influence on economic issues, and I believe we need to be first an economic leader and second, a military one. It seems Republicans would have it the other way around, and it shows.
Our economic leadership, primarily created during the 20th century when we wrested that mantle from Great Britian, is being chipped away by the Chinese. Their nation is prospering while our economy is faltering, as we spend inordinately on our military placing the em-PHA-sis on the wrong syl-LA-ble.
Sen. Barack Obama chose Sen. Joseph Biden to be his running mate, and the Democrats responded with high approval ratings for his choice. Sen. John McCain chose Governor Sarah Palin, and the Republicans responded with not only high approval but she appears to have raised his campaign from the dead! Recent national polls have shown a nice bounce to the McCain campaign following their convention, so they are relishing some momentary glory.
But just what have these candidates shown us with their picks? When the votes are all counted by November 5th, will the Bush's leave behind all their family photos, for John and Cindy to enjoy, or will it be Barack and Michelle saying, "one or two will be fine"!
Obama supporters certainly believe it will be the latter. I certainly do, because I see that Senator Obama is starting to take off a little more of the sheeps clothing; to let us know that he can be, is willing to be if the situation calls for it, an extraordinarily tough campaigner.
In Nedra Pickler's AP article, "Obama accuses Republican rivals of dishonesty" we're starting to see how our very intelligent Democratic nominees think and how they will govern. These two gentleman are two of the clearest thinkers who have ever walked the planet; intellectual giants among their peers.
What's more, they are skilled politicians. Obama is so skilled, he transformed himself from keynote speaker to Presidential nominee in four short years, knocking off his chief rival who was herself a master of her craft and supported by a juggernaut of a campaign team, to become our party's nominee. This was no minor feat and in my opinion, has not received nearly enough press. He has shown he can both throw a punch and take one.
And, he remained true to his ideals by not choosing Hillary. That singular decision highlights his strengths as a real leader. What other conclusion would we draw? He and Joe Biden are the best ticket we've had since Bill Clinton and Al Gore! My expectation is, 341-197, or better, just like James Whitson called it on March 2nd of 2008 (see President Elect).
Unfortunately, it would not be prudent to bet the whole farm on that outcome. Fortunately 270 plus is all we need.
Though Republicans have shown they are desparate, we musn't underestimate what they will do in order to win. John McCain (and his campaign leadership) let go with a Hail Mary with his selection of Sarah Palin. It has proven a good one, in the polls, particularly if the election were next week. Fortunately, we still have 8 weeks so time is on our side.
Mark Penn explains, in his Financial Times story, "Americans want to know how to fix the economy", "I think the logjam will be broken by the candidate who can explain the economic way forward".
In 2004, Dems just knew John Kerry was going to win, at 8 weeks out. He had the best plans, articulated clearly during the primaries and in the book, co-authored by John Edwards, "Our Plan for America". In Iowa, as a Precinct captain, I knew he'd carry our Precinct by at least 67%, and it seemed that Polk County would finish at least 60-40%. He did carry Polk County, by over 10,000 votes, but 10,000 votes was not enough to win the state. We needed 20,000+ to counterbalance the rest of the state. George Bush carried Iowa by 10,000 votes. And we've been grieving over that loss, and the national loss, but nearly four years.
And so this election would go, were it not for the grass roots organizing and voter registration drives that have been spearheaded by the Obama campaign. These are the greatest such efforts in history. The Republicans have become deparate, particularly since the economy is not working in their favor. The Feds taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should reveal to the undecideds that George Bush and John McCain live in a different world than the real one; one where the "economy is fundamentally strong". That phrase, if not a boldface lie, is fundamentally one.
I believe Senator Obama will be an outstanding President, on the order of an Abraham Lincoln. The jury is still out on whether the DNC can run a better campaign over the next two months than the RNC, but for trying to dupe the voters, the RNC may have earned a time out -- for at least eight years.
We'll see how it shakes out, but 341-197 is certainly the size of victory our country needs if we are to maintain our number one position of economic leadership. Eight more years of Bush-like governance and we'll be lucky if we can hang on for a close second.
I don't know what the conversation will be like when Barack Obama and Bill Clinton sit down to chat in two days, but I sure hope he'll help Barack Obama with some catchy phrases that will galvanize voters, like, "It's the economy, stupid". Some insight from James Carville, albeit behind the scenes, could be a good thing, too.
We have the wind at our back, and David Plouffe and David Axelrod have been a great guiding light for 19 months. Hopefully the halliards will hold and the Republican desparation will translate to volunteer exasperation. Unfortunately, our opponent has shown he can take a punch, and this little scrappy woman from Alaska is keeping John McCain energy level higher than we'd like.
Barack has hit it out of the park as he hangs the handle "No Change Express" on the McCain campaign. Our prayers are with you, Senators Obama and Biden -- let's paint the country blue!
Why, I just don't know how our Obama-Biden team is going to be able to compete! Holy Cow, man -- the woman can field dress a moose? All bets are off!
I just wasn't aware of the extent of the skill set she brings to the Republican ticket. While I still believe the outcome will be Obama >=341 and McCain <=197, I had been expecting a result more like 525-13 (as with Reagan vs. Mondale in 1984, but in reverse) following Senator Obama's pick of Joe Biden for VP.
I just learned (through Maureen Daud, in her NYT op-ed piece "Life of Her Party") that Fred Thompson claims Gov. Palin can field dress a moose. Why that's preposterous! It's ostentatious, gregarious and what's more, it's probably cheating for a Presidential ticket to include such talent!
I'm not sexist -- I truly am not -- but women who can field dress anything are too much of a cut above the rest of us. I don't know that we Dems have ever been up against such a lofty skillset for a VP, at least over the last 100 years. Golly Senator Biden, how can you prepare for a debate against such credentials?
A 26-year Senator, who is the current chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and a past chair of the Judiciary Committee, up against a 1.5-year governor of a state of 700K who can field dress a moose -- and a woman to boot?
Might as well just call it a day and go back to your lowly Senatorial duties. In fact, maybe John S. McCain should consider whether he might fare better in the VP slot -- just give it up now and let her have the top of the ticket.
But look on the bright side, Senator McCain. You're finally getting a little press, what will all this Prego business and the moose dressing talent. Like Michael Jackson knows, all publicity is good.
Sarah Palin, a moose killer. Who would have thunk it?
In the political world, things do get a little heated. The adage, "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" is often referenced because it seems so appropriate to the type of contest political races have become. We're often pitting one idealogy against another and we should be glad that we've become so civilized that the worst weapon we use is words. After all, it's the power of words that change the course of humankind, even more so than military might.
Take, for example, the McCain add where the campaign is trying to drive home contrasts Hillary attempted to make in attacks on Barack during the primary. Here is an excerpt from Bed Goddard's "War on two Fronts" piece, published at TheHill.com on March 5, 2008.
"The Clinton ad, called “Children” by the campaign and “3AM” by most of the press, was a shot across the bow. It didn’t air enough to really move the electorate, but it sent a clear message that Hillary Clinton was going to get tough on Obama. She began to draw a stark difference in her speeches across Ohio and Texas: She had a lifetime of experience to prepare her for the White House, Sen. John McCain had a lifetime of experience to prepare him for the White House, and Barack Obama had “a speech he delivered in 2002.” She finally found the sound bite that punched home her experience theme."
These were rough and tumble days, and at this point Hillary was mounting an all out assault on Barack, because she could see her chance to become President slipping away. It's part of why the Clintons and the campaign pushed on relentlessly, nearly spending themselves into oblivion -- they could not believe that a man who seemed mostly about words to them, was inspiring people so many. He was taking them to the cleaners often enough that he was winning!
After all, this was a Goliath vs. David story -- the most powerful Democratic political machine going up against a relative newcomer; someone almost a generation younger, not married to a past president, equipped primarily with good speeches and an ability to draw his audiences in; someone who had won a statewide election but once; someone who started the race 30-points down. One can easily understand why the Clinton juggernaut felt the tide just had to turn in their favor; if only they could find the right words.
And therein lies the heart of the matter.
Words, the expression of our thoughts, not only convey what is in our heart and mind. Words can sometimes be transforming, when skillfully crafted such that they change the thoughts, even the motives and character, of those who hear them.
Such was the course of Abraham Lincoln, in his Gettysburg address. I would argue that, were it not for these 271 words of Abraham Lincoln, his actions might not have been enough. His accomplishments, which made him arguably one of our finest Presidents, might not have entitled him to such lofty prominence. It was his words that caused our nation to enshrine a likeness of him at the west end of the national mall. Words.
On June 1, 1865, Senator Charles Sumner commented on what is now considered the most famous speech by President Abraham Lincoln. In his eulogy on the slain president, he called it a "monumental act." He said, Lincoln was mistaken that "the world would little note, nor long remember what we say here." Rather, the Bostonian remarked, "The world noted at once what he said, and will never cease to remember it. The battle itself was less important than the speech."
The battle was less important than the speech? The battle was less important than the speech! Do you hear that Hillary Clinton? Do you hear that John McCain? Words, and power thereof, were more important than the battle itself!
This is what Hillary could have said in her convention speech but neglected to do so, and to her detriment. She could have driven home the point that words are even more important, at times, than actions, because words can change the course of a nation.
Who knows where the United States would be today, were it not for the words at Gettysburg from another man supposedly "too inexperienced for the job", Abe Lincoln.
When we heard the words of "A more Perfect Union" this spring, as delivered from a podium in Philadelphia after the Rev. Wright controversy had reared its ugly head, I thought that this speech, too, shall go down in history as one of those pivotal moments when mankind took a turn toward change. It may still.
Hillary could have referenced some of the power that comes from Barack's speeches, as an explanation for why he not only bested her in the contest for the nomination, but for why he is going to make an awesome President -- perhaps as good as JFK, FDR, or even Abraham Lincoln.
That's what Hillary neglected.
Seven weeks remain and I wonder if she'll get around to noting the power of Barack words, words which are transforming a nation.
Well, I guess a fellow has to make money somehow. Shame it has to be by crossing over to the dark side. But if not these fellows, then who?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIYpkbqssKSA6_f9yaCrN7Y4XZPgD92P2ULG5
As the article states, a lot of folks watch Fox News, and they are not all Republicans. It's like how I listen to Rush Limbaugh sometimes, just because I want to hear what stupid, idiotic quip he's going to make next.
As it turns out, I did watch Fox for coverage of the Barack-Biden event in Springfield and they did an admirable job.
While Howard Wolfson and Lanny Davis may have been biased against Obama, making them particularly sensitive to any positive statements made on MSNBC during the primary campaign, I don't envy the job of newscasters who need to appear unbiased. That's a tall order. About the only one that gets that job done is C-Span, and the number of folks who call in saying even C-Span is biased is legend.
It's going to be an exciting week.
During the past 20 years, we've seen the relentless pursuit of taking from the poor to give to the rich. Political pundits could argue this for days, weeks, and make zero progress regarding whether "trickle down" has ever accomplished any of its original objectives. To be an advocate of these economic policies, you have to see the world totally differently -- about 180 degrees differently from me, and I trust most Obama supporters.
From where I sit, many CEO's, the "rich" and the wealthy -- the men/or women with the gold -- are not going to favor an Obama Presidency, unless they really care about humankind. There are a few of those folks out there, quite a few, but there were a lot of saducees and pharisees, too. Jesus wasn't too impressed with them, and I don't think he'd be very impressed by many of these CEO's either.
The vast majority don't have a clue what it's like to worry about whether you can make that $15 minimum credit card payment on time, thereby avoiding the $39.00 late fee. Or whether you can pay for your needed drugs, food, house payment, etc. They just don't see why that is any of their concern.
Quite a few haven't had to worry about such problems for a very long time, maybe never. If you have a few minutes, Stephen Foley, of The Independent offers an excellent post "Race for the presidency: The colour of money" . A few excerpts caught my eye.
"So the CEO stars are racking up for McCain. So is the CEO money. A recent analysis of campaign data showed that the chief executives of the biggest 100 companies in the Fortune 500 have given a collective $208,200 (£111,700) in donations to McCain – more than 10 times the $20,400 donated to Obama. Some of these generous executives have been hedging their bets, handing cheques to both candidates, attending both sets of fundraisers. It is all good networking, after all.
Others, however, have swung decisively in favour of McCain. On top of the maximum $4,600 that he could have contributed to the candidate personally, Ivan Seidenberg – the chief executive of Verizon Communications, Vodafone's US mobile phone partner – has contributed a further $28,000 to the McCain campaign's political action committee.
The analysis of the political donations of the Fortune 500's most prominent chief executives caused a bit of a stir, since it added to the sense of nervousness on the Democrat side. It would be a kooky day in US politics if this constituency favoured the Democrats, but the 10-to-one lead by McCain contrasted sharply with the situation in the 2004 presidential election. Then, the Democrat nominee John Kerry at least managed to rake in almost three-quarters as much as George W Bush did from the same group of executives.
The Obama campaign dismissed the importance of the analysis, saying the Bush campaign had a much broader base of contributors among the Fortune 500's top chief execs, whereas McCain has raised more money from fewer people".
------
I think it's obscene that Ivan Seidenberg, of Verizon Wireless fame, can make a donation $28,000 to ANY political action committee. I don't care if it were to a PAC for McCain, or to a PAC for Obama, but to be able to have that much impact on an outcome of a Presidential election seems, to me, immoral. I hope Obama's Presidency ushers in an era in which this kind of influence peddling come to an end.
Why should people with money be allowed to influence the decisions of government representatives this much? Just because you have money doesn't give you any more rights than a person without money to preserve the reality of one man, one vote. Unless, of course, the US is really a communist country, an oligarchy, plutocracy, a dictatorship, a monarchy, etc. If we are to remain a democracy, or more accurately, a Democratic Republic, we should honor the Preamble; "all men are created equal" and to do so, our government needs to virtually eliminate influence peddling.
Is that possible? No, but one individual paying $28,000 to any PAC fund should be illegal! We should pay our governmental representatives well enough that they can buy their own lunch. This is what Senator Obama came to Washington to help change four years ago, and the Feingold-Obama ethics and lobbyists reform bill goes a long way toward accomplishing that goal.
Back to the "Man with the Gold making the Rules" ... Here is an example of the egregious nature of the rich controlling the poor. I'd like to see a standardized payment cut-off time for credit card companies (how about midnight, for example?) rather than one company setting it for 3:00PM, another for 7:00PM, etc. Some companies show the payment due on a weekend date but will not allow payment on that date; you have to figure it out on your own that it's a weekend date, and if try to pay then? -- ca-ching! -- a $39.00 late payment fee! What a crock -- the poor pay more all the time and these injustices need to be rectified.
I sure hope Barack Obama is inaugurated as President, on January 20, 2009, because "the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice", and he will usher in a new era of justice for the poor and middle class. This has been one of Barack's favorite quotations of Martin Luther King, Jr for over two decades. It's firmly planted in his subconscience. Oh Lord, keep this man safe.
While he is definitely not the Messiah, Barack Obama's understanding of who Jesus Christ was, and how he wanted us to treat our fellow man, seems much closer to the New Testament version than that of John "to the gates of Hell" McCain. I even like the fact that he still questions just "who is God?" People who think they know really scare me.
Obam--Biden '08/'12!
I know that all of we Obama supporters already know this. And, unfortunately, McCain supporters do as well. But what about those folks, like Ben Stein, who are actively declaring that they will vote for one of the lesser candidates -- like Ralph Nader.
Yepper, Ben Stein, as brilliant as he is, has confessed to a strong desire to make his voice not be heard. He would argue to the contrary -- that by voting for Ralph Nader, he will be aligning the power of his vote for the candidate with whom he is most closely aligned, philosophically, politically, morally, even religiously, and along whatever other scale one can choose -- but he would be dead wrong.
Let's take Ralph Nader, for example. He's registered in 22 states. This could have changed, but that's what is shown currently at PresidentElect.org. If he won every single one of those 22 states, the maximum electoral votes he would receive is 235, a full 35 votes below the threshold.
Not wanting to be too greatly in error, I clicked on VoteNader.org and discovered James Whitson is falling behind in his updates. The total is now 28 states, and their goal is 45 by September 20, still 5 shy of the 50 states and DC maximum.
Then there is the reality test that must be applied. In 2000, 97,488 Floridians voted for Ralph. The difference between George Bush and Al Gore was 537 votes. Now I ask you, what percentage of the votes that Nader received would have gone to Al Gore, were Ralph Nader's name not on the ballot? 60%? 70%? It would be good to know, but it's only academic at this point.
538 votes more and Al Gore would have won Florida (I won't rehash the Florida voting problems. Hopefully, eight years later, FL has ALL of the bugs worked out of their voting system. Since they had to sacrifice 1/2 of their Delegate count because of the audit trail bill, but I digress).
There is too much at stake this election to vote for anyone other than the mainstream parties, unless one just loves throwing their vote away. Certainly people can vet these two candidates and pick the one that is more closely aligned with their personal beliefs of who would be best.
I guess some people don't want to think that hard?
Like teflon, a lot of the negatives seem to slide right off Barack Obama. Why? Because whenever people peel back the veneer by investigating him more thoroughly, his intellect, integrity, values, and ability to find consensus where there is usually great division, shines through.
A thorough vetting of John McCain, on the other hand, shows why he was trailing in the Primary early even among his own Republican base, and for good reason. He seems to talk a good story (and we saw the best of his story-telling at the Saddleback Forum on Saturday) but we have to meander through a field of significant landmines more hazardous to his character than Barack has had time to acquire.
Of course, McCain is adept as a military man, but unless you're in the military yourself, you likely believe the President has to do a lot more than be a good commander-in-chief.
At PresidentElect.org, where I go to find the most objective electoral analysis that I have found on the web, we're beginning to see the benefits of the Democratic Primary fight drawing to a close. It's unfortunate that Hillary and Bill can't get more behind Barack, but inspite of their lackluster joy from having earned the silver, Obama's gold was earned, because he is an extraordinary candidate. He has staying power and can take a Karl Rovian-style, Republican punch.
On March 2nd, Whitson entered as his forecast, a 341-197 victory for Obama. Unfortunately, during the next two months, the train was nearly derailed; Hillary won a few and would not sit down. She continued to attack Barack in anyway she could, desparately in debt but unrelenting in her pursuit.
The logical time for her to have quit? Right after the North Carolina and Indiana outcome. She could have done the honorable thing for the party right then, but she hung in there -- as either a testimony to her strength or to her weaknesses; I could argue either side of that story, and if you're objective, so could you -- but the toll was a loss for Obama' momentum.
Bill is obviously still NOT fully on board, and she only grudgingly so. At least that's my take on it. I'd love to be proven wrong but the Clinton juggernaut is a political dynasty and can we blame them for wanting to stay in the limelight? Of course not, but it is time for them to pass the baton and hopefully that will happen during convention.
In spite of that, Obama is staring to pull away. According to Whitson' analysis of individual state polls (the only ones that count), the momentum is back with Obama.
July 17, 2008: Obama (D) - 293; McCain (R) - 245June 9, 2008: Obama (D) - 284; McCain (R) - 254May 5, 2008: McCain (R) - 279; Obama (D) - 259April 7, 2008: Obama (D) - 275; McCain (R) - 263March 2, 2008: Obama (D) - 341; McCain (R) - 197
Will the 50-state strategy of registering new voters get our team back to the 341-197, or better, victory? My brain says yes, my heart says for sure, but my gut says maybe.
We'll know a lot more after the conventions, but if there were ever a year when the Dems are positioned for a rout, like the Reagan vs. Mondale results but in reverse, this is it. I think those who are prejudiced against Obama will have to vote their brain and not their gut for it to happen, but there is hope. Why?
Because McCain is stumbling badly. He continues to show mental fatigue (I won't say pre-altzheimers but I have no problem stating physical or mental fatigue) as his multiple gaffes on the campaign trail show. His hot-headed tendencies also remain unfettered. (A man quick to answer is also a man who can be quick to be wrong. George Bush has proved this over and over again).
After the Iraq war, do we want a President who has a hair-pin trigger finger to have access to the nuclear option button? Would he really "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran?". When it comes to negotiating with Iran, I want someone with a much calmer demeanor to be in charge, and I think 70% of Americans do, too.
Maybe it's just my bias, but are we seeing signs that Obama is beginning to pull away? I predict that once the rest of the populace engages, following the conventions and the selections of veeps, we're going to see his electoral lead expand, into the 300's, as he climbs back to the 341 lead of March.
341, or better, that's my prediction. America is ready for change.
I don't have time to investigate why I don't know ever great political writer there ever was, or even just the ones who are outstanding for this election cycle. Nope, can't do that.
All I have time to do is quickly jot down a line to say, if you haven't read this article/blog post already, you really, really, really need to stop reading this and just click on this -- now!
You'll not regret it one bit. What an awesome wordsmith!
I'm looking forward to Saturday's Rick Warren moderated, CNN covered, forum. I just know he's going to do well.
I haven't read all of this yet, but there are 8 fairly long chapterss, so it takes a bit.
http://www.wmsa.net/People/john_mccain/ariz-republic_chap_I_1999.htm
And here is a link to the home page for some older news.
http://www.wmsa.net/People/john_mccain/mccain.htm
I don't know if I'll spend a lot of time here, but it is good to know, "Just who IS this John McCain?" when we're out knocking on doors.
How did "we the people" evolve to such a high level that we can allow a neoconservative administration to run ram shod over our constitutional protections and liberties without major protest? Because the frog in the pot is too busy enjoying the warm water to realize he's about to become the main ingredient of frog stew.
Our founding fathers enscribed into our constitution safeguards, designed to prevent one branch of the government dominating another. Unfortunately, the modus operandi in Washington appears to support the notion that it's okay to keep reading "My Pet Goat" for six unnecessary minutes, while the WWTC's are being attacked. It's okay to fall asleep at the switch, and let the executive branch declare themselves potentate, cannonizing through executive decree the demise of our liberties, in the name of anti-terrorism.
I would vote for Barack Obama if for other reason than our elders have let us down. It's time for a change, and a major one.
Republicans, Democrats, Independents and all the others, will argue among ourselves ad infinitum, ad nauseum over policies, platforms, issues, strategy and tactics for fighting wars, yet if the electorate is more interested in sports and reality shows than being actively involved in the direction of the country, then we will get the government we deserve.
In the last week of July, we saw the tit-for-tat political commentaries escalated to a fervent pitch because John McCain needed to downplay the gains of an arguably strong Obama foreign policy coup d'etat. What else would draw 200,000 out to see Barack Obama in a memorial park -- in Germany -- than the fact that the rest of the world wants change even worse then we do? Our foreign policy has orchestrated like the elephant shopping for china -- we've been that subverting our own liberties in the name of anti-terrorism, and selling armaments to the mid-east all the while saying Iran is the one destined to promulgate war. Our killing of 100's of thousands of innocents in an endeaver to promote democracy in Iraq is just one small example of the "collateral" damage of poor foreign policy decision making that has left the world yearning for a new direction. Obama offers that change and John McCain is extremely jealous.
Certainly, the McCain campaign will try to knock Obama out of the pole (or poll, if you like) position in anyway they can, and they have a right to promulgate whatever ever messages are legal, but if "we the people" let our emotions rule over our brains, then Benjamin Franklin's warning from over 200 years ago.
Most of us know the story, but it's worth reiterating. And, with today's modern search engines, it took no time at all to find a link to Franklin's warning, in a speech given by none other than Rep. Ron Paul.
(I often thought after it became apparent that Ron Paul would not win the Republican nomination, that many of his positions were similar to Barack Obama's. I expect that many of his supporters, were they to study Obama's "Blueprint for Change" would quickly become Obama supporters. Yet once the mold has been cast, many people become entrenched so strongly in their positions that they cannot see the forest for the trees).
All of these other "also ran" candidates for President do not have a chance at the Presidency, but some of them might draw away enough votes from Senator Obama that they would help usher in another 4-8 years of our elders letting us down.
With a 9.5 Trillion dollar deficit, which is growing by over a billion per day, I just can't see how anyone could be supporting a candidate who has had 30 years to help bring about change but has accomplished very little.
Rehashing the valor of a 6+ year stint as a military POW shows that Sen. McCain might make a decent military man. He's too old to sign up again, so now his supporters want "we the people" to elevate him to the only military office for which he is eligible -- to become commander-in-chief.
And when I listen to these ads comparing Barack to Paris or Brittany, and their attempts to tear down Barack Obama's stellar accomplishments, including his primary victory over the most powerful Democratic political machine of the last 40 years -- I'm fearful that there are still far too many prejudice people in this country that wouldn't vote for a bi-racial man if he were the messiah himself -- "The one", so to speak.
Just one more glaringly obvious testimony to how our elders have let us down, for far too long, and for why we need to heed the warnings of Benjamin Franklin. When we have a true leader as candidate and the only way the opposition feels they can win is to belittle, promote prejudice and hatred, and attemtp to denegrate in every way the legitimacy of his candidacy, will we allow these elders to carry the day on November 4th?
Not if the man whose is celebrating his 47th on August 4th has anything to say about it, and his millions of supporters.
Help celebrate Barack's birthday today by getting involved in his campaign for "Change We Can Believe In". Get thee to a local Obama office -- they are popping up like the stories of Republican corruption at the highest levels of our government; Tom Delay, Larry Craig, Ted Stevens, the now contemptuous Karl Rove, and many more -- it's no wonder the youth are having to take control and get active in this campaign for change! Make 47 contacts today, and bring some more into the movement for change. We need every vote in order to win the landslide of 341-197 that we are very likely to obtain!
Our elders seem intent on destroying what took our founding fathers a revolution and 231 years to build -- "a Republic, if we can keep it".
Andrew Lietzow, MBA - An x-Reagan Democrat who even voted for Ross Perot, who is tired of tit-for-tat and the dumbing down of our culture. Stand for Change -- vote Obama '08!
