Saturday, July 5, 2008
Stop Playing into the McCain Distortion Game
Here's an interesting email from me to an Obama listserv recently on the need for the left to stop hobbling Obama:
Obama is not perfect, nor should any of us think him to be.
Think about it logically. If Obama is the "unifier" that we think him to be, what does that logically require? That's right, he will need to sit down with constituencies in BOTH parties, discuss MANY points of view, and arrive at an informed and intelligent decision with respect to the issues of the day. Many times he will agree with us. In many other circumstances, which I guarantee you will be more than infrequently, Obama will disappoint us because he believes something different or needed to compromise.
Look at how John McCain played us recently. Obama gave a speech on Iraq where he outlined the position that he's always had about withdrawing from Iraq. He has always said that he will immediately sit down with his military commanders to begin drawing up plans for withdrawing troops from Iraq. He set targets and planned 2 brigades out per month -- going up until 2013!
So, he gets up and says nearly the exact same thing and then the Republican distortion machine and John McCain run around crying "FLIP-FLOPPER!" "CHEATER!" "MOMMY!" And, what do we do as good Democrats? Yup, take up the Republican talking points and start hand-wringing and moaning in public on DailyKos and other sites about how worried we are that Obama will abandon us! Woe!
I mean no offense by any of this but we need to keep perspective. We must absolutely not do anything to hobble Obama's chances in the Fall. I know this sounds like squelching but what's the alternative!? Hobbling Obama enough to get McCain elected? No thank you. I will save my public moaning and hand-wringing for tightly messaged emails to the campaign and for after the election.
Here's The Carpetbagger Report on how John McCain spun the media (and the left) about Obama's Iraq position:
The more the presidential campaign unfolds, the more it resembles a Twilight Zone episode in which reality has no meaning at all.
For over a year, Barack Obama’s position on Iraq has been entirely consistent — a flexible withdrawal timeline, over 16 months, with one to two brigades a month. He would consult with commanders on the ground about how best to execute this policy, and would consider conditions on the ground, but Obama is committed to a withdrawal policy. He’s said this over and over again.
Yesterday, when Obama repeated the exact same policy he’s emphasized for over a year, the McCain campaign and the national political media — the distinctions between McCain and his “base” continue to blur — pounced. Obama, they said without evidence or connection to reality, had changed his policy.
The problem, of course, is that McCain and the traditional media outlets had already picked the narrative in advance. Republicans decided recently that Obama would change his Iraq policy. Why? Because they said so, and proceeded to repeat the claim, incessantly, over the last 10 days. Major news outlets, demonstrating 2000-like levels of professional malpractice, bought into it. Why? Because Republicans told them to like the “move to the center” narrative, and the media is anxious to acquiesce.
Read More: McCain gets busy, the media gets spun, and Obama gets screwed
Friday, July 4, 2008
Obama - A Candidate We Can Have Pride In
Bob Ceska sums up part of my feelings over the last few weeks:
What attracted me to Senator Obama's candidacy wasn't that he was going to evolve into some kind of liberal messiah who I would agree with all the time. He never really made any promises of that sort, and it was clear -- especially to Kucinich and Edwards supporters -- that Senator Obama wasn't entirely in line with what are generally considered to be netroots or progressive causes. Rather, he's always been the pragmatic liberal whose every slogan and statement -- often employing the collective pronoun "we" -- seeks common ground between deep blue and blood red. He's the liberal who this week, while simultaneously reaching out to evangelical voters, issued an unequivocal statement of opposition against any constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. That's textbook Obama.
After I read the letter of support he sent to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club, I remembered why I chose to support the senator's campaign -- and why it evolved into an enthusiasm for a politician that I've never quite experienced in my adult life. So why then...? In the simplest terms possible, choosing to support Senator Obama has never been about issues, but rather, it's always been about, 1) electing a thoughtful, smart president we can reference with pride -- a president who won't flatly embarrass us every damn day, and 2) electing a president who can inspire and negotiate the necessary support he'll need to roll back the darkness of the Bush years.
Jesse Helms Died Today
Here's a sample of the racism and homophobia that typified his career:
As an aide to the 1950 Senate campaign of North Carolina Republican candidate Willis Smith, Helms reportedly helped create attack ads against Smith's opponent, including one which read: "White people, wake up before it is too late. Do you want Negroes working beside you, your wife and your daughters, in your mills and factories? Frank Graham favors mingling of the races."
Another ad featured photographs Helms himself had doctored to illustrate the allegation that Graham's wife had danced with a black man. (The News and Observer, 8/26/01; The New Republic, 6/19/95; The Observer, 5/5/96; Hard Right: The Rise of Jesse Helms, by Ernest B. Furgurson, Norton, 1986)
Ancient history? No. Helms remains unapologetic to this day. Forty years after the Smith campaign, Helms would win election against black opponent Harvey Gantt with another ad playing to racist white fear-- the so-called "white hands" ad, in which a white man's hands crumple a rejected job application while a voiceover intones, "You needed that job…but they had to give it to a minority."
In columns, commentaries and pronouncements from the Senate floor, Helms sowed hatred and called names: The University of North Carolina was "the University of Negroes and Communists." (Capital Times, 11/22/94) Black civil rights activists were "Communists and sex perverts." (Copley News Service, 8/23/01)
Over the years Helms has declared homosexuality "degenerate," and homosexuals "weak, morally sick wretches." (Newsweek, 12/5/94) In a tirade highlighting his routine opposition to AIDS research funding, Helms lashed out at the Kennedy-Hatch AIDS bill in 1988: "There is not one single case of AIDS in this country that cannot be traced in origin to sodomy." (States News Service, 5/17/88)
More recently, when a caller to CNN's Larry King Live show praised guest Jesse Helms for "everything you've done to help keep down the niggers," Helms' response was to salute the camera and say, "Well, thank you, I think." (Wilmington Star-News, 9/16/95)
Read More
Move
Well, I packed up my life in New York and arrived in Chicago last night. No, not to work at Obama HQ (although being in Obama's town doesn't hurt things).
As a result, my posts might become somewhat intermittent for a couple weeks until I move into my new condo.
Court: Bush Engaged in Illegal Wiretapping
Breaking News! George W. Bush has been explicitly and cravenly breaking the law and subverting the Constitution!
Oh, not a surprise to you? Well, maybe a new ruling in a Federal case dealing with Bush's illegal wiretapping activities, in direct contravention of the explicit intent of Congress in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, might raise some eyebrows:
A federal judge in California said Wednesday that the wiretapping law established by Congress was the “exclusive” means for the president to eavesdrop on Americans, and he rejected the government’s claim that the president’s constitutional authority as commander in chief trumped that law.
The judge, Vaughn R. Walker, the chief judge for the Northern District of California [who was appointed by George H.W. Bush (irony!)], made his findings in a ruling on a lawsuit brought by an Oregon charity. The group says it has evidence of an illegal wiretap used against it by the National Security Agency under the secret surveillance program established by President Bush after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
...
“Congress appears clearly to have intended to — and did — establish the exclusive means for foreign intelligence activities to be conducted,” the judge wrote. “Whatever power the executive may otherwise have had in this regard, FISA limits the power of the executive branch to conduct such activities and it limits the executive branch’s authority to assert the state secrets privilege in response to challenges to the legality of its foreign intelligence surveillance activities.”
Obama Talks to Us Honestly About FISA
Whether you agree or disagree with him on his stance on FISA, it's remarkable to have such a smart, forthright person running for President. Obama on his FISA stance:
I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.
This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
...
Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.
...
Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.
Read More
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Obama's Tax Plan - Now with Facts!
If I listen to one more McCain surrogate sit on television and LIE about Obama's tax plan, I may have to buy a new TV after what I do to it in a fit of rage.
Here's some of the basic facts (for those of you who still care about such things) of Obama's plan vs. McSame's, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center:
Obama raises taxes on families with incomes above $250,000, and only on those families. [Period. Full Stop.]
...
Obama's middle-class tax cut, about $1,000, is three times that of McCain's, about $300. Obama cuts the taxes of 81 percent of families; McCain, 56 percent.
...
McCain amps up the Bush tradition of saving the biggest tax cuts for the wealthiest families. That top 0.1% group gets a $270,000 tax cut under his plan.
Read More: Tax Policy Center's Assessment of Obama's Tax Plan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
