Congratulations to Barak Obama on his South Carolina Win...Still waiting to see who comes in second. I don't know when or if American voters might choke at uncertainty mixed with racism, but if they're gonna start to have second thoughts, I hope that its before the general election.
I guess that Bill Clinton didn't win much of anything until later in the primary season, so its impossible to guess what will happen as this thing goes on. As far as I'm concerned, with Edwards, its all about the message, and hopefully he will have a good long time to talk about these very important issues. Its early to pick a winner in this, but as much as I hear that people hate Hillary, I'm also hearing some trepidation that Obama might not have the experience that is is necessary for this time of war. If we get any kind of terra surprise, we might see a result that we didn't bargain for. I hope to god that any of our candidates who moves towards the front of the pack is ready to react and act like they know what they're doing and they're gonna kick some terra-ist ass !

c/p RIPCoco

Labels: John Edwards, Obama, primaries

Life after the morning shows?
Planet Earth on Discovery Channel.....
The world outside seems pretty big sometimes.... and the pathological bullshit going on in here is sort of unbearable in the face of this:



These guys can stay down for up to 30 mins!
Forget the tiny pandering of the animals with the biggest egos on this planet. we've got nothing compared to the survival skills that are evolving every day out there on Planet Earth...Pick your nature show, folks, and sit right down for a heart warming HD journey into how small we really are in the scheme of things. Maybe I'm getting old, and maybe its that I resisted the new technology for so long, but high definition really is the new hallucinogenic for people of a certain age.

And that drowning feeling? Well, after long strange dreams about swimming in the tropics with old ex-friends who I hope to never see again, I was brought back to Mitt Romney by Frank Rich, who shines a light once again on the should-be criminal ball-dropping of the pundits and press in this country. The frustration of that on this icy morning, chipping away at the path, and fuming about how a swift boat attack is all that could stand between us and a Romney presidency, is just too much for my weakened sensibilities!
Surely, its our fault because we give them the ratings, but then, we also don't have much choice, do we? Why would it be so wrong to bring back some type of fairness doctrine? What are they so afraid of if they are so right...?

So, we watch the same old corpses, and hope for an explosion by the likes of Larry O'Donnell, who has been as much as pooh-poohed this week for his temper last week, as opposed to looking at what it was that he said that was just so unseemly.
According to Frank Rich in today's New York Times:

Pushed over the edge by his peers’ polite chatter about Mitt Romney’s sermon on “Faith in America,” Mr. O’Donnell branded the speech “the worst” of his lifetime. Then he went on a rampage about Mr. Romney’s Mormon religion, shouting (among other things) that until 1978 it was “an officially racist faith.”

That claim just happens to be true. As the jaws of his scandalized co-stars dropped around him, Mr. O’Donnell then raised the rude question that almost no one in Washington asks aloud: Why didn’t Mr. Romney publicly renounce his church’s discriminatory practices before they were revoked? As the scion of one of America’s most prominent Mormon families, he might have made a difference. It’s not as if he was a toddler. By 1978 — the same year his contemporary, Bill Clinton, was elected governor in Arkansas — Mr. Romney had entered his 30s.

The answer is simple. Mr. Romney didn’t fight his church’s institutionalized apartheid, whatever his private misgivings, because that’s his character. Though he is trying to sell himself as a leader, he is actually a follower and a panderer, as confirmed by his flip-flops on nearly every issue.

Polite chatter. That's what gets me. Its politeness that got us where we are now...so, for Christ's sake, lets at least look at the truth before we install another idiot president in place of the current one. The words that we shall not speak are the ones that need to be spoken, so lets look at the skull and bones underpants of this thing. The Iraq war shows us that if we keep quiet in the runup to a disaster, it can be nearly impossible to disentangle ourselves from the ensuing mess.

Racism; I keep hearing it mentioned as a cautious point on why we shouldn't support Obama. He might not be able to win the general. But that caution belies a disconnect with what is really going on out there.
Its evident in how the press and other candidates on both sides underestimated the Oprah-Obama factor. Its evident in the condescending way with which Oprah, who is arguably a spokeswoman for not only African Americans in general, but American women and her fan base, which spans larger than most of us realize, was dismissed as a pop-icon with no real weight in something as heady as an election. Think again. The woman who decided to turn her back on trash talk, and who got the country reading again, is more powerful than maybe Jesus, and probably, at least as powerful as the M$M's script for this thing. At least she knocked things around a bit and made the contenders show some of their real colors. This is not Springsteen or Bon Jovi rallying the kids; Oprah is another animal altogether and she speaks to a different place in the psyche of real people who are struggling to get by. Why? I really don't know. Call it a mysterious phenomenon; but don't disregard it.

Oprah is a populist who has taken chances for her convictions, and as much as she turned her back on the wrestling masses that Jerry Springer gave a stage to for ratings, she still has been a forgiving force who finds the common ground that represents every person in every trailer park, every upper east side matron, and those in-between. Its uncanny how she has built on that and has managed to remain above the fray in her objectives, and its not something that anyone could have predicted. But, I would think that people who watch this stuff for a living might be a little more aware of who Oprah is.

Even as Oprah represents the black thing when she goes into her hey girl! ghetto voice or does her MLK I have seen the mountain tone,she crosses a line that white America cant cross; not even Hillary as the wife of the "first black president," or whatever he was....but as she crosses those lines, she does it as if white and brown America are right there with her. She makes people of all colors warriors in a battle that is more intellectual than anyone realizes. She is talking about racism, which is absolutely knee-jerk visceral in those who grew up in places where it was ingrained, but she does it as if we were all in the battle together against what might even be something even within ourselves. What works about this is that she has a tone of self-forgiving and understanding, which makes it all more understandable and acceptable as something that we all need to change. I say all of this as someone who doesn't much watch Oprah and who is not much of a fan, unless she has on a specific subject that I want to see.

According to Rich, though, the worry about ingrained racism shouldn't be that much of a problem for Obama:

Race is certainly a part of the groundswell, but not in a malevolent way. When I wrote here two weeks ago that racism is the dog that hasn’t barked in this campaign, some readers wrote in to say that only a fool would believe that white Americans would ever elect an African-American president, no matter what polls indicate. We’ll find out soon enough. If that’s the case, Mr. Obama can’t win in Iowa, where the population is roughly 95 percent white, or in New Hampshire, which is 96 percent white.

I’d argue instead that any sizable racist anti-Obama vote will be concentrated in states that no Democrat would carry in the general election. Otherwise, race may be either a neutral or positive factor for the Obama campaign. Check out the composition of Oprah’s television flock, which, like all daytime audiences, is largely female. Her viewers are overwhelmingly white (some 80 percent), blue collar (nearly half with incomes under $40,000) and older (50-plus). This is hardly the chardonnay-sipping, NPR-addicted, bi coastal hipster crowd that many assume to be Mr. Obama’s largest white constituency. They share the profile of Clinton Democrats — and of some Republicans too.

And that sticky religion thing? The things that we might prefer not to mention? Oprah and Obama both come off as pretty heavily religious, but they are not exclusive or freaky, like the underpants that Romney and his folks wear:

“Church free” is the key. This country has had its fill of often hypocritical family-values politicians dictating what is and is not acceptable religious and moral practice. Instead of handing down tablets of what constitutes faith in America, Romney-style, the Oprah-Obama movement practices an American form of ecumenicalism. It preaches a bit of heaven on earth in the form of a unified, live-and-let-live democracy that is greater than the sum of its countless disparate denominations. The pitch — or, to those who are not fans, the shtick — may be corny. “The audacity of hope” is corny too. But corn is preferable to holier-than-thou, and not just in Iowa.

I don't know about anyone else, but the idea of an Obama candidacy seems sort of nice to me. I don't want another Clinton crammed down my throat and I want real chance. I'm willing to, at least, pretend that there is some choice and that big corporations and oil interests don't control everything. Whats the worst thing that can happen? Hasn't it all happened already?

In an absolute reversal of the prevailing news blackout on John Edwards, this week's Newsweek calls John Edwards The Sleeper and The Road Warrior, and talks about how he really could win Iowa and become a contender in the big show:

But it's worth keeping in mind just how wrong the media echo chamber can be when it comes to predicting winners and losers. At about this time four years ago, Vermont Gov. Howard Dean was the press-anointed darling who could seemingly do no wrong in Iowa. Dour John Kerry was scorned by reporters as the should-have-been who had blown it and couldn't possibly win. But on caucus night, Kerry wound up the victor—and Dean wound up screaming. Reporters were left to wonder what they had missed. One story the talking heads may be missing this time: just how badly John Edwards hates to lose.

I'm so tired of being told who my candidate is gonna be. I'm so tired of the likes of Chris Matthews and his ilk bleating on about how Hillary cant possibly lose...so, why bother even voting? It seems to me that as the networks have a responsibility to not give results too early on election day, they should try to act like there is a choice and try to encourage people to vote. The problem with them is that their responsibility is to the shareholders and not to the process. Every time I get the feeling that I'm being told to not bother any longer, I send Edwards some money. I honestly think he is the best one for the job at this time, and I honestly think that he has a chance. I also would like to make Chris Matthews and Tim Russert wrong (even though they have started to change course already...cue Sam Seder's backup beep!)
Its just nice to see a little coverage of Edwards, as if he were there and an entity in this race, and its also a nice article. It acts as if he is some new guy that no one knows about...but the background never gets old in a race like this.

Huckabee is on the cover of the New York Times Magazine this week and if you needed any further evidence of his particular brand of insanity, just look to the third paragraph for Huckabee's joy at the endorsement of Tim LaHaye, the author of the Left Behind series and game. I wrote about the game a year ago here, and, really, if Huckabee believes in the wrathful Jesus of the Left Behind series, and that our kids should be playing a game that allows them to ride at the side of the angry Jesus and kill those who were not raptured up to heaven (your choice of automatic weapons!)...you know, the left behind...kill 'em all! This is when I start to wonder what the fuck is going on in the republican party; what could they be thinking?

Chris Matthews played a video today of a fake Huckabee commercial that is supposedly posted on Andrew Sullivan's site. I didn't see it there, or on YouTube, but I am looking for it.

Labels: John Edwards, lef, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Obama, Oprah Winfrey, religion

Godspeed to John Edwards. With the Iowa Caucuses offering probably the most fair picture of middle Americans (albeit, jaded by this rather heady process that allows most of them to meet and talk with the candidates,) barreling towards us, and Barack and Hillary neck and neck, with only one mistake possible between the two of them, John is well within the margin of error, with a good network already in place in New Hampshire. I really believe that Edwards is the only electable candidate that isn't under the sway of the powers of the ego/career trap or the big power of the ruling corporations that quake at the idea of Edwards raining on their parade. For God's sake, when are Americans going to look at the hard facts and cast a vote that serves them and their fortunes, instead of voting on a vague impression taken from media bytes being thrown about by the M$M.


I would be very interested in seeing Barack Obama win this thing too; as opposed to Hillary....BUT...I don't know if he has enough political experience to get things done in the office, and whoever gets this one has to hit the ground running. At the same time, I like the idea of ideals being tossed about; I liked the West Wing and I can easily see Obama starring in the next generation. But I get this red flag warning, strobing G-R-I-D-L-O-C-K. Maybe it will be that way to an extent anyway, considering that the war will become ours on inauguration day, and we are doing nothing to make it clear that there is a laundry list of criminals here, and their crimes are being glaringly ignored. If we don't go after the criminals now, we deserve what we get.
Can Obama handle the fallout of 8 years of the Bush crime syndicate?

To me, Edwards holds the key to the undoing of the insane policies that have been sliding into place since Reagan. He also doesn't care anymore what they say about him and what they do to him. He has been through it all and acts with the air of someone who is just concentrating on being himself, and screw the handlers and bullshit. Edwards still has a chance and I hope to god that he has the support in Iowa among people who are weighing the actual policies of the candidates.
And to be absolutely sure of this, it looks to me in hi-def, like Edwards has recently freshened up his botox, as has Chris Matthews. Whatever it takes, I'm for it!

On the other side, its clown-time all the time...its never over.
Rudy cackled through Timmeuh Russert's, "tough as they get..." according to Chris Matthews, questioning (NOT!) on Meet the Press. Every time he was asked about his scandalous ongoing rip-off of NYC during his tenure, he cackled hysterically, like a crazy man. But then, Matthews talking about cackling, is a bit of pot-kettle-black, and his ranking of who is a tough interviewer....well, these guys are so involved with each other's asses that its not worth getting angry anymore. Oh, and by the way, Matthews thought that Romney's not-Mormon, religion speech, was the best speech of the campaign! Huh? Hasn't he heard Edwards? Obama?...hell, even Oprah reading off cards, in her MLK-black voice, was better than that. He made no sense and he came off as disingenuous.

Lets get real about the church of Mormon and Mitt Romney's bullshit speech that has already gotten too much airtime by now. Mormon: There is a self appointed leader to whom,it is purported, Jesus himself appeared in 1820, and subsequently an angel dictated the Book of Mormon to him. Thus began a cult of Jesus-freakishness, in which Jesus is considered the creator of everything, replacing God, except to get a little help or direction from him here and there. There is some sort of planetary influence a la Scientology, a disgusting amount of sexism and racism, and the belief that those who don't practice this particular form of Christianity will not go to heaven. The notion that the followers were sent from heaven where they previously resided with god, and that they are following a predestined path in order to gain experience for their return to heaven, removes basic responsibility from them of having to question their assumed authority about all things Jesus; the rest of us be damned...unless we want to get baptized into the cult...then I guess we're saved, only to be explained away as some wandering sheep that have found their way back to the fold; as part of the grand predestined design, of course...like, to teach the rest a lesson...?

Mitt says that America's founders didn't mean to separate church from state THAT much, but at the same time he says that he will do his best to keep the two separate, except that...he is a devout Mormon, and so he must have believed the particularly disgusting teachings that he no doubt followed in his early 20's, such as the belief that blacks are from Mars, while Mormons are from Venus! yup....This group has a dirty history worth looking into, and old Mitt, by proclaiming his devotion throughout the years, particularly naming times of his life that he was still a Mormon, has made it clear who he is...exactly clear.

Larry O'Donnell hit this straight on yesterday on McLaughlin. I was so relieved to see someone able to express the disgust that I have been feeling about the fundamentalism coming from sectors of the republican party, that I started to count the minutes until this showed up on the YouTubes. Larry O'Donnell has the first comment, and its really the only thing you need to hear on this joke of a debate on religion and what the candidates intend to do with it.


I'm not a religious person, but I respect the urge in others, if it gives some comfort. Its certainly nice to have some belief and community in this world; something that I personally lack. I just cant see anyone with the devout belief that a certain group of people are going to heaven (coming from heaven, even,) and the rest of us are going to hell, (or are from hell,) as capable of being a leader to us all. Can one just set those sorts of beliefs aside? I didn't get the feeling from old Mitt's speech that he is able to separate anything from his religion.

...Oh and, he is no JFK...nope, not at all....


Bill Maher on Mormonism


Next: Huckabee is a freak!

c/p RIPCoco

Labels: Barack Obama, Bill Maher, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, Obama, religion, Rudy Giuliani

Americans have grown so frighteningly apathetic that as Petraeus gives his report on the Iraq Surge, there will be a mechanical background hum of daily life as gears grind and stock tickers tick in the gray world...and in some sort of 1984 Macintosh commercial, the big screen in Times Square will show a picture of the uniform with the mouth moving, as if in an Olbermann/Letterman/O'Brien/Snuffleupagus weekly funny. Why do I feel so numb about this report?...even though I've waited for it, painfully aware of every death reported since we were put off through the summer...

According to...well, just about every major news outlet, pollster, and blog out there, the majority of the American people feel that this report is full of shit and that Petraeus is less than trustworthy when it comes to his view of the success of the surge in Iraq. Though it does appear that everyone is going off the same wire report for the percent of Americans who are disgruntled, I still believe it holds true across the board.

Even Petraeus himself seems to be trying to get a coded message out by frantically blinking his eyes in Morse:

In a letter to US troops ahead of his testimony, Gen Petraeus conceded that the ”tangible political progress” expected from that the surge was supposed to spur had ”not worked out as we had hoped”.

The tragedy is that once you've sold your soul, that's it. Its not like Petraeus and his ilk cant go on to write their books and make their speeches.... but forget the legacy and respect that might be due a guy like this. I just don't believe that a career officer can deliver these dummied up talking points, while clearly trying to backpedal here and there, and not be somehow haunted by it forever.


I dont even have hope that the senate will surprise us with a major smack down, and yet we know that what he is going to say is likely to put a positive spin on a grim situation. This is the kind of thing that would have made me salivate back in the days of hope, but the realities of such a close majority in the Senate, and the tendency of people in office to have a troubling amount of respect for the uniform, (which I understand, but which also must be questioned in a situation like this,) makes it almost certain that this may be a flat reading of a White House script, written weeks and months ago by the Rovian spinners who are no doubt still in the office finishing up the architecture job for the boss.

Ill be watching most of it with interest, if for nothing else, for the psychological implications of this time in history, and the arrested development of our country.

Bill Maher had a fantastic show last night, and all I can say is that if you've got HBO on demand, have a look at it. If not, check out the HBO page and look at the videos there, as well as YouTube. I also watch AfterHours online, streaming from the HBO page. That also turns up on YouTube. But in the meantime here are this week's New Rules, just for a little of the funny before a hard week to come:



Oprah Winfrey....hmmmm...
I don't much go for the overly black girlfriend thing that she does sometimes, and even though I respect her and what she has done, I get a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach when I see her corralling Hollywood and throwing down for a guy who is inspiring but ultimately not experienced enough to WIN. I'm not saying that I wont vote for him if he is the nominee, but I doubt very much that he will be the nominee. I also feel like he puts on certain airs, and I'm not 100% sure what it is that he stands for exactly. I say this from a place of having seen him debate live and watched him on TV alot...and Ive also read most of his site from the beginning because I find him somewhat compelling in a futuristic sort of way.












In any case, I appreciate that Oprah wants a black guy as president, and that women want a woman...I don't take it very seriously right now, because I am so pleased with our field...but I do wish that she had thrown her formidable power behind the democratic nominees in 2000, and in 2004. In the world of life and death that the Bush administration has created for us, it seems to me that in the past she donated money but remained largely above the fray, because she was trying to be a news person. I'm glad to have her voice out there...but wary at the same time. Oprah Winfrey is a cultural phenomenon, who has certainly tried , against all odds, to raise the level of the culture. But we don't really know what she stands for, and she wields quite a bit of power.


Jezebel has a lighter view of Oprah's huge splash into the pool of presidential campaigning:

The woman, the black, the black, the woman, the woman, the black... OMG IT'S LIKE A REALITY DATING SHOW. We like Hillary and all, except we kind of don't want to vote for her, and neither, it turns out finally, does Oprah Winfrey, who after extensive focus-grouping and analysis of the candidates' respective adherence to the Law of Attraction (i.e. coin-flipping) yesterday , finally decided to come out and endorse Barack Obama. (UPDATE: Okay, so she had endorsed him already, but then she decided to start raising serious bank for him yesterday, and that's the important part.)...and Barack is black, and Oprah's black, and Oprah's from Chicago, but so are Barack and Hillary, but Hillary left, so that must have been it, right? Because it's not like you'd vote for somebody based on a thorough evaluation of their policies, priorities, voting records and level of beholdenness to various entrenched interests? We don't know, because we lean towards Obama, but some of us are fairly Caucasian. So what did to black women have to say? We searched far and wide for two undecided black women voters who would speak their minds.

And upon asking around:

Which settles it. Identity politics are over. It's all about bone-dentity politics. Personally, we're leaning towards Obama, but only by the transitive property of being hot for Ludacris.

C/P from RIPCoco

Labels: Bill Maher, General Petraeus, Iraq War, Obama, Oprah Winfrey

OK, grab your popcorn, because this ought to be good:

Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, one of the most prominent Democrats in the 2008 presidential field, proposed for the first time setting a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq, as part of a broader plan aimed at bolstering the freshman senator's foreign policy credentials.

Obama's legislation, offered on the Senate floor last night, would remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008. The date falls within the parameters offered by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which recommended the removal of combat troops by the first quarter of next year.

The days of our open-ended commitment must come to a close," Obama said in his speech. "It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy. It is time to give Iraqis their country back."


The Obama plan, called the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007, would begin a troop withdrawal no later than May 1, 2007, but it includes several caveats that could forestall a clean break:

It would leave a limited number of troops in place to conduct counterterrorism activities and train Iraqi forces. And the withdrawal could be temporarily suspended if the Iraqi government meets a series of benchmarks laid out by the Bush administration. That list includes a reduction in sectarian violence; the equitable distribution of oil revenue; government reforms; and democratic, Iraqi-driven reconstruction and economic development efforts. Obama's proposal also would reverse Bush's troop-increase plan....Obama described his proposal as a mainstream package of well-vetted ideas, consistent with the Iraq Study Group's recommendations and "with what the American people demanded in the November election," when they voted Republicans out of power in both the House and the Senate.

The details of the Obama plan are here. Good for Obama for doing this. My beef with him has been his excessive caution and unwillingness to take a stand on anything. While this plan still allows far too many American soldiers to die for this failed war between now and 2008, it at least describes concrete steps for extricating the U.S. from this disastrous civil war, and reminds the Crawford Caligula just who is in charge of the pursestrings. Nice. The one giant gaping hole in the plan as put forth in Obama's web site is what the consequences might be for Iraq FAILING to meet the benchmarks. As yet, no one seems willing to address that possibility. The absence of such consequences here has echoes of the same delusion that Bush has: "It will work because it has to."

In contrast, Hillary Clinton not only does not have any position papers on Iraq (or anything else for that matter) on her campaign wab site, but so far her position on Iraq is "Hey, George, clean it up before you leave." This demonstrates that she still doesn't get what she's dealing with in this Administration. She voted for this war and has still not expressed regret for that vote, claiming that "if we knew then what we know now there never would have been a vote. I never would have voted to give this president that authority."

Sorry, Hill, but that just won't wash. I knew that Bush was determined to go to war. So did a half-million people who marched in New York City in February 2002 and millions more nationwide. If I, a mere citizen knew what you were dealing with in 2002, why didn't you?

This is a Big Bold Move for Obama, perhaps the first of his Senate career. It dares Hillary Clinton to take a stand, and positions Obama in stark contrast to John McCain (who may not be the one to watch at this point).

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out on both sides of the aisle.

Labels: George W. Bush, Iraq, Obama