This comment to Eric Alterman's "Altercation" blog expresses pretty well my main problem with Ralph Nader's presidential candidacies--since he puts no effort into getting other third party candidates elected to lower offices, since he puts no effort into building a viable third party, since he does nothing but show up every four years and ask for media attention--since, in other words, he hasn't done anything resembling the kind of genuine, grass roots party building that Howard Dean did after his presidential run--I find it hard to take Ralph Nader's candidacies as much more than ego trips.
http://mediamatters.org/altercation/200811250014#8
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Now what?
So, um...now what?
Seriously, even long before the end of this election, I've wondered this--in various forms:
Now that the Bush era is done, do we stop mistrusting government--or just stop mistrusting it so much? I would vote for the latter. It's important for liberals and progressives (whatever you want to call them) to stay vigilant against a President Obama--perhaps even more so, because the temptation is to let him get away with anything. Does the lefty blogosphere that's popped up during, and arguably due to, the Bush administration disappear now? I think it's very possible it will become less vibrant, less urgent, less angry. I hope it will not go away, however, because it's become a force for progress. What happens to the center-left coalition that swept Obama into office? Does it crack up after his first compromise? Do all the lefties throw up their hands when Obama signs something suspiciously conservative into law or uses military force against Al Quaeda? I hope, as I said, that we will criticize him--but I hope, at the same time, something of this unity remains. We'll see...
Finally, what becomes of what John Stewart has called the "satirical-industrial complex" of Daily Show, Colbert Report, Onion, Bill Maher, etc.? They got us through these last eight, surreal years. Will we still laugh at our own guys? There have been troubling signs all along that we are unable to do so. I would hate to lose that critical, comedic perspective. Hopefully we lefties can actually learn to laugh at ourselves, instead of just the other guy.
Seriously, even long before the end of this election, I've wondered this--in various forms:
Now that the Bush era is done, do we stop mistrusting government--or just stop mistrusting it so much? I would vote for the latter. It's important for liberals and progressives (whatever you want to call them) to stay vigilant against a President Obama--perhaps even more so, because the temptation is to let him get away with anything. Does the lefty blogosphere that's popped up during, and arguably due to, the Bush administration disappear now? I think it's very possible it will become less vibrant, less urgent, less angry. I hope it will not go away, however, because it's become a force for progress. What happens to the center-left coalition that swept Obama into office? Does it crack up after his first compromise? Do all the lefties throw up their hands when Obama signs something suspiciously conservative into law or uses military force against Al Quaeda? I hope, as I said, that we will criticize him--but I hope, at the same time, something of this unity remains. We'll see...
Finally, what becomes of what John Stewart has called the "satirical-industrial complex" of Daily Show, Colbert Report, Onion, Bill Maher, etc.? They got us through these last eight, surreal years. Will we still laugh at our own guys? There have been troubling signs all along that we are unable to do so. I would hate to lose that critical, comedic perspective. Hopefully we lefties can actually learn to laugh at ourselves, instead of just the other guy.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
An overfull moment
There are so many things I want to/could say about Barack Obama's election as President. But, this is what I want to say first: That moment, at about 11:10 p.m. Eastern Time, when Keith Olberman announced that Barack Obama would be the next president, was one of the most, if not the most, powerful moments in my life. In one moment, 8 of the darkest years in American politics, especially for liberals, and 200 years of guilty history in a country whose Constitution permitted slavery, turned. Flipped. Changed utterly. Amazing.
Monday, November 3, 2008
excited, nervous, hopeful
The title sums it up. I'm amped for this thing. Been phonebanking the last few days. As obsessed with the polls and news stories as always.
Nothing more to be said--Let's do this!
GOTMFV!
Nothing more to be said--Let's do this!
GOTMFV!
Friday, October 10, 2008
I can't believe it.
I haven't been blogging. But, I have definitely been paying attention. (Probably, in terms of my schoolwork and my sanity, too much attention.) I've been obsessing over liberal blogs and news sites, donating, e-mailing others to donate, traveling to Philly to canvas--and being obnoxious about posting things on facebook. I kind of came to the conclusion that I had a better chance of communicating the importance of the election through my facebook contacts. (I mean, who actually reads my blog?)
But, anyway...My point is this. I know what's going on. I know a lot of people are saying Obama will win, that the polls say so. I will not let myself believe it. No. First of all, polls change. These will change. Second, in all of my adult life, I have known only disappointment and exasperation when it comes to Presidential elections. Clinton won when I was an adolescent, and this made me think that--much like Michael Jordan's Bulls--my team would always win. Then, 2000. The first election I could vote in. The first one I got involved in.
Stolen. Let's not mince words. It was stolen. And stolen by possibly the most dishonest, disastrous President in our nation's history.
2004. I was in it. I was ears deep. I invested my heart and soul into that campaign, believing our country could NOT be so dumb as to opt for four more years of incompetence, greed, and religious extremism.
We lost. We lost Iowa. We lost Congress. We lost governorships.
We lost the Presidency because a gay marriage ballot in Ohio got the bigot vote riled up. And I lost any interest or faith in politics. I just gave up on the whole swampland.
It wasn't until Obama amazingly won my lily-white home state this year, setting off his epic battle with another history-making candidate, that I could muster the ability to care again. And now...I'm in over my ears. I'm 10 feet below the surface. I've never cared about an election like I care about this one. We have a chance, I think, in electing Barak Obama, to atone for the sins of 2000 and 2004. I am not prone to exaggeration, but I believe, based on what I have seen of how he's organized his campaign, that Obama is a brilliant man, a natural, a natively talented leader. His election would reverse, in one swoop, a great deal of the hatred and anger the rest of the world feels towards us. I think he could lead the Democrats into an era of dominance we haven't seen since FDR. Circumstances are conspiring to make this possible. By which I mean, we have the closest thing to another Depression--an economy that is begging for another New Deal.
And...he would be the first black president. I did not think I would see this. I still may not. I can't believe it's so close.
Which is why I'm reserving judgment, delaying excitement. It still could be very close. Race could make that happen. I plan to donate at least once more to Obama. I plan to go to Philly (or Ohio, if I can swing a long weekend?) If anyone's reading, I ask you to do the same.
Donate or Volunteer:
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
The Congressional Dems also need help:
DNC:
http://www.democrats.org/
Daily Kos' "Orange to Blue" tool for supporting close races nationwide:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/orangetoblue?refcode=thermometer
But, anyway...My point is this. I know what's going on. I know a lot of people are saying Obama will win, that the polls say so. I will not let myself believe it. No. First of all, polls change. These will change. Second, in all of my adult life, I have known only disappointment and exasperation when it comes to Presidential elections. Clinton won when I was an adolescent, and this made me think that--much like Michael Jordan's Bulls--my team would always win. Then, 2000. The first election I could vote in. The first one I got involved in.
Stolen. Let's not mince words. It was stolen. And stolen by possibly the most dishonest, disastrous President in our nation's history.
2004. I was in it. I was ears deep. I invested my heart and soul into that campaign, believing our country could NOT be so dumb as to opt for four more years of incompetence, greed, and religious extremism.
We lost. We lost Iowa. We lost Congress. We lost governorships.
We lost the Presidency because a gay marriage ballot in Ohio got the bigot vote riled up. And I lost any interest or faith in politics. I just gave up on the whole swampland.
It wasn't until Obama amazingly won my lily-white home state this year, setting off his epic battle with another history-making candidate, that I could muster the ability to care again. And now...I'm in over my ears. I'm 10 feet below the surface. I've never cared about an election like I care about this one. We have a chance, I think, in electing Barak Obama, to atone for the sins of 2000 and 2004. I am not prone to exaggeration, but I believe, based on what I have seen of how he's organized his campaign, that Obama is a brilliant man, a natural, a natively talented leader. His election would reverse, in one swoop, a great deal of the hatred and anger the rest of the world feels towards us. I think he could lead the Democrats into an era of dominance we haven't seen since FDR. Circumstances are conspiring to make this possible. By which I mean, we have the closest thing to another Depression--an economy that is begging for another New Deal.
And...he would be the first black president. I did not think I would see this. I still may not. I can't believe it's so close.
Which is why I'm reserving judgment, delaying excitement. It still could be very close. Race could make that happen. I plan to donate at least once more to Obama. I plan to go to Philly (or Ohio, if I can swing a long weekend?) If anyone's reading, I ask you to do the same.
Donate or Volunteer:
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
The Congressional Dems also need help:
DNC:
http://www.democrats.org/
Daily Kos' "Orange to Blue" tool for supporting close races nationwide:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/orangetoblue?refcode=thermometer
Thursday, September 4, 2008
What wins elections
I was thinking, after watching Sarah Palin's sarcastic, snarky, and dismissive speech, about what it would mean if John McCain wins this election. Not in terms of policies or what it will do to America's well-being or place in the world--that's a whole 'nother depressing topic. I mean--what does it mean about politics in America? It will mean, I think, that cynicism, sarcasm, and avoiding the issues wins elections. It will mean that counting on the fact that voters aren't paying attention to your lies, stretched truths, flip-flops, hypocritical statements, and full-of-shit spin wins elections. It will mean that cheap, political stunts win elections.
Obama has tried to run a different kind of campaign, in a lot of ways. (He is still a politician, of course, but a far less cynical one than we've become accustomed to.) Obama has tried to criticize John McCain without demeaning him. He has always insisted on honoring McCain's military service, while pointing out the truth of what he stands for politically. He has insisted that Sarah Palin's family is not up for criticism, despite the other side's unfair and demonizing criticism of Obama's wife. He has tried to run a campaign that involves the input and energy of thousands of every day people. He has spoken seriously about topics of great importance to the country--energy independence, war and peace, job losses, and the failure of modern politics and politicians.
John McCain's campaign has been about sarcasm and belittling its opponent. Instead of touting any realistic proposals for the economy or the war, they spend obscene amounts of money on advertisements saying Obama is like Paris Hilton. I mean, come on! They lie and say that Obama will raise taxes on the middle class (he will return tax levels to pre-Bush levels on the very wealthy--in other words, repeal the irresponsible tax cuts McCain himself originally opposed, until it became politically expedient to support them, which he now does.) Then, McCain pulls a political stunt and puts a laughably unqualified evangelical woman on his ticket in a transparent attempt to get some Clinton and Bush voters in one swipe. Who cares if her experience is far less than the man they said was too inexperienced to be president? Then, she gets up on stage and spews lies and sarcasm, belittling the work of community organizers, falsely claiming that Obama has never authored legislation (in fact, he's authored important legislation on securing nuclear weapons and ethics reform, among others). She lies and says she opposed government pork, when she in fact supported ridiculous earmarks for her town and state, including the "bridge to nowhere." And, instead of talking about real political issues, or revealing that she knows or thinks ANYTHING about national or international affairs, she makes fun of Obama's stage, his speeches, and his time helping poor people in South Side Chicago find work.
If THAT'S what the American people vote for, then it means Bush and Rove were right: Politics is about appealing to the worst in people. A lot of us were hoping Obama could prove them wrong. He still might, but the fact that it's even close is downright depressing.
Obama has tried to run a different kind of campaign, in a lot of ways. (He is still a politician, of course, but a far less cynical one than we've become accustomed to.) Obama has tried to criticize John McCain without demeaning him. He has always insisted on honoring McCain's military service, while pointing out the truth of what he stands for politically. He has insisted that Sarah Palin's family is not up for criticism, despite the other side's unfair and demonizing criticism of Obama's wife. He has tried to run a campaign that involves the input and energy of thousands of every day people. He has spoken seriously about topics of great importance to the country--energy independence, war and peace, job losses, and the failure of modern politics and politicians.
John McCain's campaign has been about sarcasm and belittling its opponent. Instead of touting any realistic proposals for the economy or the war, they spend obscene amounts of money on advertisements saying Obama is like Paris Hilton. I mean, come on! They lie and say that Obama will raise taxes on the middle class (he will return tax levels to pre-Bush levels on the very wealthy--in other words, repeal the irresponsible tax cuts McCain himself originally opposed, until it became politically expedient to support them, which he now does.) Then, McCain pulls a political stunt and puts a laughably unqualified evangelical woman on his ticket in a transparent attempt to get some Clinton and Bush voters in one swipe. Who cares if her experience is far less than the man they said was too inexperienced to be president? Then, she gets up on stage and spews lies and sarcasm, belittling the work of community organizers, falsely claiming that Obama has never authored legislation (in fact, he's authored important legislation on securing nuclear weapons and ethics reform, among others). She lies and says she opposed government pork, when she in fact supported ridiculous earmarks for her town and state, including the "bridge to nowhere." And, instead of talking about real political issues, or revealing that she knows or thinks ANYTHING about national or international affairs, she makes fun of Obama's stage, his speeches, and his time helping poor people in South Side Chicago find work.
If THAT'S what the American people vote for, then it means Bush and Rove were right: Politics is about appealing to the worst in people. A lot of us were hoping Obama could prove them wrong. He still might, but the fact that it's even close is downright depressing.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Experience
Did John McCain choose Sarah Palin as his running mate in order to create some kind of false equivalence between her paltry experience and Obama's (relatively) brief, but exceptional experience?
Perhaps.
It's a ridiculous equivalence to make, however. Look, Obama served for eight years in the Illinois Senate, representing a diverse, heavily populated region that encompassed rural areas, rust-belt regions, and the third-most populous city in the United States. He has served four years in the United States Senate, again representing the complex and diverse entity of Chicago and its environs. He passed legislation securing nuclear weapons across the globe and enforcing ethics reform for the nation's most powerful elected officials. He has thought about and made sophisticated policy statements and proposals about international affairs--beginning with his strong condemnation of the Iraq war before it began, when it was a very popular notion. He studied and taught Constiutional Law, studied at Harvard Law School, and worked as a community organizer in poverty-stricken South Side Chicago. He has shown remarkable grasp of the difficult topics necessary for the leader of the free world.
Sarah Palin has served as governor for about a year-and-a-half for one of the least populated, least diverse (racially and economically) states in the Union, one lacking any large urban center. Before that, she was the mayor of a town with a population of about 6,000 (which she saddled with $20 million in debt). I grew up in a town of about the size. I do not believe the mayor of Iowa Falls should be next in line for the most powerful political position in the world, in the history of the world, behind a 72 year old man with a history of cancer. I don't think Sarah Palin should either. In terms of knowledge, she has a bachelors degree in journalism. She has never made any pronouncements about national or international affairs, stating that she hadn't really thought about Iraq because she was focussed on Alaska's affairs. Good thinking. She should have stayed focussed on those issues and turned down John McCain's reckless and ill-considered offer of the Vice Presidency. What does she believe? What does she know about national and international issues? What does she know about the rest of the country and world? Obama has answered these questions in countless speeches, debates, interviews, and policy proposals. Palin is quite simply in over her head. Hopefully, the Republicans are not able to shield her from the tough questions she should have to answer. But, I fear they will, and she will simply hide behind her mildly interesting personal story.
It could be disastrous for this country if Sary Palin is dumped into the role of President, which could very likely happen. I never wanted John McCain to get elected, but now I'm pretty scared about what could happen if he was--and about how poor his leadership and decision-making skills must be.
This whole argument is made much better here:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/the-shock-of-pa.html#more
Perhaps.
It's a ridiculous equivalence to make, however. Look, Obama served for eight years in the Illinois Senate, representing a diverse, heavily populated region that encompassed rural areas, rust-belt regions, and the third-most populous city in the United States. He has served four years in the United States Senate, again representing the complex and diverse entity of Chicago and its environs. He passed legislation securing nuclear weapons across the globe and enforcing ethics reform for the nation's most powerful elected officials. He has thought about and made sophisticated policy statements and proposals about international affairs--beginning with his strong condemnation of the Iraq war before it began, when it was a very popular notion. He studied and taught Constiutional Law, studied at Harvard Law School, and worked as a community organizer in poverty-stricken South Side Chicago. He has shown remarkable grasp of the difficult topics necessary for the leader of the free world.
Sarah Palin has served as governor for about a year-and-a-half for one of the least populated, least diverse (racially and economically) states in the Union, one lacking any large urban center. Before that, she was the mayor of a town with a population of about 6,000 (which she saddled with $20 million in debt). I grew up in a town of about the size. I do not believe the mayor of Iowa Falls should be next in line for the most powerful political position in the world, in the history of the world, behind a 72 year old man with a history of cancer. I don't think Sarah Palin should either. In terms of knowledge, she has a bachelors degree in journalism. She has never made any pronouncements about national or international affairs, stating that she hadn't really thought about Iraq because she was focussed on Alaska's affairs. Good thinking. She should have stayed focussed on those issues and turned down John McCain's reckless and ill-considered offer of the Vice Presidency. What does she believe? What does she know about national and international issues? What does she know about the rest of the country and world? Obama has answered these questions in countless speeches, debates, interviews, and policy proposals. Palin is quite simply in over her head. Hopefully, the Republicans are not able to shield her from the tough questions she should have to answer. But, I fear they will, and she will simply hide behind her mildly interesting personal story.
It could be disastrous for this country if Sary Palin is dumped into the role of President, which could very likely happen. I never wanted John McCain to get elected, but now I'm pretty scared about what could happen if he was--and about how poor his leadership and decision-making skills must be.
This whole argument is made much better here:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/the-shock-of-pa.html#more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)