If you believe the parade of sexual harassment claimants and one alleged mistress, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain is a mack of epic proportions, a Big Daddy Cain. And clearly the only chocolate sister he has any love for is his wife, although if these claimants and alleged mistress are telling the truth, I would not want to be loved that way.
Even if these ladies are telling the truth, and I'm not saying they aren't, they aren't the reason why Herman Cain should lose the nomination.
I'd be the first to admit that Bill Clinton, unfaithful as he was, was far and away the smartest president we've had in a long time. Unless you were on welfare, life was pretty good under Clinton.
Bill Clinton is precisely why Herman Cain should lose. I would call this the Clinton Principle: As long as you do your job well, no one should care who you screw. But you better damn well do an exceedingly good job.
Herman Cain, in contrast, is incapable of doing the job of POTUS. Why? He's an idiot.
Yep, I said it: Herman Cain is an idiot.
It is absolutely appalling and insulting to listen to him discuss foreign affairs. His dismissiveness of the press is insulting to the public. He's so not ready for primetime. At best, he's ready for naptime.
And that's why Herman Cain should lose. Not because he has an alleged wandering Johnson. Because he's an idiot.
Yep, I said it. And I don't care that he's African-American. He's an idiot.
Bill Clinton wasn't.
Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts
It's The Economy, Mr. President . . . And Some Better Communication, Too
Dear Mr. President,
You described the turn of events in Tuesday's mid-term elections as a "shellackin'." The Republicans have claimed victory and a rejection of your policies, Speaker-Elect Boehner has declared himself the new sheriff in town, and Speaker Pelosi is pondering her future.
Were this about any of you personally, your collective opinions might matter. But they don't because it's not about any of you, your parties, or the normal shift of power that happens during the midterms.
It's the economy, Mr. President, plain and simple. Oh, and some better communication, too. At the risk of being brash, let me, as the young kids say, break it down for you, Mr. President.
With all due respect, Mr. President, when people were losing their jobs and their homes, you failed to make the case clear as to why bailing out the Wall Street whackjobs was going to make Michael and Mary Middle-Class or Wendell and Wanda Working-Poor any better off. Bailing out AIG, BofA, and Goldman didn't translate into apparent gains for the middle class and the working poor. Sure, you probably staved off having the entire world economy go off the cliff, but you never clearly answered the gut-level, self-interested, Adam Smith-esque question on every financially terrorized taxpayer's mind -- "What's in it for me?" You simply failed to connect the dots or show your work in this transitive equation. Plus, you didn't dot your I's and cross your T's to make sure that the bailed-out banks that were "too big to fail" were also required to start lending again and to start modifying the very mortgages that got them in this hot mess in the first place. And when Goldman was getting zero interest loans from the Fed and turning around to buy t-bills, basically pimping the government that helped them, I know I felt like a piece of taxpayer tail. I'm sure other hard-working, tax-paying Americans did, too.
Second, you failed to make people who were losing their jobs and their homes understand why health care was such a high priority that it had to be dealt with first before the economy got back on track. Sure, you passed the stimulus, but you got so bogged down in the health care debate that you failed to again connect the dots as to when, where and how the stimulus would work. With unemployment higher now then when you took office, you no longer get to blame your predecessor --even if it is his fault -- because things got worse on your watch. I'm to blame, too, as I got caught up in health care reform fever and the idea of what could be accomplished, and I did so from the comfort of a secure job, albeit one with wage cuts. But health care reform isn't and wasn't a priority to folks who don't have jobs and don't have homes, especially when no emergency room is ever going to turn them away if they're in dire straits.
Third, you failed to communicate consistently and substantively about your accomplishments. Frankly, Mr. President, I think you assume a level of understanding that's over the head of most of the people you lead. Sure, you need the facts and figures to back up your assertions, but you need to speak simply, plainly, and consistently about the results you've achieved. When you face setbacks, as you have with unemployment, you need to do more than commiserate -- you need to state simply, plainly and consistently what you're going to do differently when confronted with bad results.
Fourth, you didn't take the Tea Party seriously until it was too late. I live in Tea Party Central, and I have friends and neighbors in the Tea Party. They know I'm a liberal Democrat, and on local issues, we are actually in agreement -- local governments have to be fiscally conservative because they don't print their own money. You needed to not only respect the Tea Party but address their concerns early and head on, as well as confront their policy inconsistencies -- like opposing health care reform as Socialist but not wanting to lose Medicare or Social Security -- in a consistent and respectful manner. And you needed to ask this very important question: What would you do differently, and how would that accomplish the goal of lowering spending and reducing the deficit? I get along with Tea Partyiers for two reasons: One, I'm respectful and admit they do have some valid points, because they do; and Two, I have the luxury you don't have -- I don't have to engage them on issues of national policy. I'm able to agree with them on local issues. Maybe you need to find some issues -- ANY ISSUES -- with which you can agree with them and make peace. If they fail to meet you halfway in finding solutions to the nation's problems, then that reflects on them, not you. Perhaps you should have just the newly-elected Tea Party candidates to the White House for -- what else -- tea?
Fifth, you failed to keep the momentum of your campaign going. You got all these new young voters and unlikely voters to the polls, and then you hunkered down with the usual wonks and pols and didn't use them, didn't call them until the midterms came around. Pardon my language, Mr. President, but you made the movement you created in 2008 into an electoral booty call. The problem with a booty call is that you can't call two years later asking for another one. By that time, the other person has moved on. So did your youth vote and your unlikely voters.
Finally, you forgot that you are a black man in America. There are people out there who want to see you fail just because of that and the fact that they believe you're not entitled to what you have because of your Ivy League pedigree that they don't have. As you know, politics is all about relationships, and maybe you need to be more accessible and overcome the latent prejudices I know some of our political leaders may have by simply getting to know folks better. Quite frankly, when I voted for you for president of the Harvard Law Review, I thought you were kinda aloof then, but since the Law Review tries to appear to be a meritocracy, it didn't matter -- you were able to win on the sheer strength on your intellect. And, quite frankly, I hated Law Review and was pretty aloof myself. Well, Mr. President, the nation isn't a meritocracy -- in fact, we embody the "tall poppy" syndrome of our neighbors south of the equator and enjoy taking down in size the folks who are smarter than we are, especially if we believe their good fortune is undeserved. People can oppose you as a smart-ass Ivy League elite when in fact they despise you because of your race, and they can find common ground with those who despise you because you appear to be a smart-ass Ivy League elite. That's why Republicans are doing the happy dance on a whole host of fronts. That's why Bill Clinton never played the "Rhodes Scholar" card in public -- he understood that he had to get along to go along and not to appear as smart as he was. In other words, instead of appearing to be a tall poppy, he chose to embrace being a Bubba poppy in public. With all due respect, stop being a tall poppy and start being the likable poppy.
But net-net, as my best friend says, you gotta get people back to work. Co-opt the Republicans' plans to do this if you must, but if people aren't back to work soon, all of you in Washington will be turned out in 2012. It's the economy, Mr. President, plain and simple. It's not personal when people don't have any money. They'd vote for a goat if it had a workable economic plan.
Mr. President, I would really like to see you have a second term because, more than any other president in my lifetime, I think you understand that the decisions you make have to be good for the country for generations to come and not just for the next election cycle. I believe the Democratic Party and Speaker Pelosi believe the same. But if you don't get people back to work, you won't have the privilege of making the long-term decisions for our country's best interests. I think that if you take these points under advisement and plan accordingly, you can have a second term. You're not the first president to get shellacked during the midterms. This is your challenge, and I believe you can rise above it.
Sincerely,
Black Woman Blogging
P.S. Could you also get a consistent policy on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? If you don't support it, let it die, no matter how it gets killed.
P.P.S. Please tell Speaker Pelosi to man up . . . uh, I mean, woman up. As my mom used to say, "We all get knocked down in life. And you can lie there for a little while. But then you have to get back up." If she allows this defeat to keep her down, she's going to take a generation of future women leaders with her.
You described the turn of events in Tuesday's mid-term elections as a "shellackin'." The Republicans have claimed victory and a rejection of your policies, Speaker-Elect Boehner has declared himself the new sheriff in town, and Speaker Pelosi is pondering her future.
Were this about any of you personally, your collective opinions might matter. But they don't because it's not about any of you, your parties, or the normal shift of power that happens during the midterms.
It's the economy, Mr. President, plain and simple. Oh, and some better communication, too. At the risk of being brash, let me, as the young kids say, break it down for you, Mr. President.
With all due respect, Mr. President, when people were losing their jobs and their homes, you failed to make the case clear as to why bailing out the Wall Street whackjobs was going to make Michael and Mary Middle-Class or Wendell and Wanda Working-Poor any better off. Bailing out AIG, BofA, and Goldman didn't translate into apparent gains for the middle class and the working poor. Sure, you probably staved off having the entire world economy go off the cliff, but you never clearly answered the gut-level, self-interested, Adam Smith-esque question on every financially terrorized taxpayer's mind -- "What's in it for me?" You simply failed to connect the dots or show your work in this transitive equation. Plus, you didn't dot your I's and cross your T's to make sure that the bailed-out banks that were "too big to fail" were also required to start lending again and to start modifying the very mortgages that got them in this hot mess in the first place. And when Goldman was getting zero interest loans from the Fed and turning around to buy t-bills, basically pimping the government that helped them, I know I felt like a piece of taxpayer tail. I'm sure other hard-working, tax-paying Americans did, too.
Second, you failed to make people who were losing their jobs and their homes understand why health care was such a high priority that it had to be dealt with first before the economy got back on track. Sure, you passed the stimulus, but you got so bogged down in the health care debate that you failed to again connect the dots as to when, where and how the stimulus would work. With unemployment higher now then when you took office, you no longer get to blame your predecessor --even if it is his fault -- because things got worse on your watch. I'm to blame, too, as I got caught up in health care reform fever and the idea of what could be accomplished, and I did so from the comfort of a secure job, albeit one with wage cuts. But health care reform isn't and wasn't a priority to folks who don't have jobs and don't have homes, especially when no emergency room is ever going to turn them away if they're in dire straits.
Third, you failed to communicate consistently and substantively about your accomplishments. Frankly, Mr. President, I think you assume a level of understanding that's over the head of most of the people you lead. Sure, you need the facts and figures to back up your assertions, but you need to speak simply, plainly, and consistently about the results you've achieved. When you face setbacks, as you have with unemployment, you need to do more than commiserate -- you need to state simply, plainly and consistently what you're going to do differently when confronted with bad results.
Fourth, you didn't take the Tea Party seriously until it was too late. I live in Tea Party Central, and I have friends and neighbors in the Tea Party. They know I'm a liberal Democrat, and on local issues, we are actually in agreement -- local governments have to be fiscally conservative because they don't print their own money. You needed to not only respect the Tea Party but address their concerns early and head on, as well as confront their policy inconsistencies -- like opposing health care reform as Socialist but not wanting to lose Medicare or Social Security -- in a consistent and respectful manner. And you needed to ask this very important question: What would you do differently, and how would that accomplish the goal of lowering spending and reducing the deficit? I get along with Tea Partyiers for two reasons: One, I'm respectful and admit they do have some valid points, because they do; and Two, I have the luxury you don't have -- I don't have to engage them on issues of national policy. I'm able to agree with them on local issues. Maybe you need to find some issues -- ANY ISSUES -- with which you can agree with them and make peace. If they fail to meet you halfway in finding solutions to the nation's problems, then that reflects on them, not you. Perhaps you should have just the newly-elected Tea Party candidates to the White House for -- what else -- tea?
Fifth, you failed to keep the momentum of your campaign going. You got all these new young voters and unlikely voters to the polls, and then you hunkered down with the usual wonks and pols and didn't use them, didn't call them until the midterms came around. Pardon my language, Mr. President, but you made the movement you created in 2008 into an electoral booty call. The problem with a booty call is that you can't call two years later asking for another one. By that time, the other person has moved on. So did your youth vote and your unlikely voters.
Finally, you forgot that you are a black man in America. There are people out there who want to see you fail just because of that and the fact that they believe you're not entitled to what you have because of your Ivy League pedigree that they don't have. As you know, politics is all about relationships, and maybe you need to be more accessible and overcome the latent prejudices I know some of our political leaders may have by simply getting to know folks better. Quite frankly, when I voted for you for president of the Harvard Law Review, I thought you were kinda aloof then, but since the Law Review tries to appear to be a meritocracy, it didn't matter -- you were able to win on the sheer strength on your intellect. And, quite frankly, I hated Law Review and was pretty aloof myself. Well, Mr. President, the nation isn't a meritocracy -- in fact, we embody the "tall poppy" syndrome of our neighbors south of the equator and enjoy taking down in size the folks who are smarter than we are, especially if we believe their good fortune is undeserved. People can oppose you as a smart-ass Ivy League elite when in fact they despise you because of your race, and they can find common ground with those who despise you because you appear to be a smart-ass Ivy League elite. That's why Republicans are doing the happy dance on a whole host of fronts. That's why Bill Clinton never played the "Rhodes Scholar" card in public -- he understood that he had to get along to go along and not to appear as smart as he was. In other words, instead of appearing to be a tall poppy, he chose to embrace being a Bubba poppy in public. With all due respect, stop being a tall poppy and start being the likable poppy.
But net-net, as my best friend says, you gotta get people back to work. Co-opt the Republicans' plans to do this if you must, but if people aren't back to work soon, all of you in Washington will be turned out in 2012. It's the economy, Mr. President, plain and simple. It's not personal when people don't have any money. They'd vote for a goat if it had a workable economic plan.
Mr. President, I would really like to see you have a second term because, more than any other president in my lifetime, I think you understand that the decisions you make have to be good for the country for generations to come and not just for the next election cycle. I believe the Democratic Party and Speaker Pelosi believe the same. But if you don't get people back to work, you won't have the privilege of making the long-term decisions for our country's best interests. I think that if you take these points under advisement and plan accordingly, you can have a second term. You're not the first president to get shellacked during the midterms. This is your challenge, and I believe you can rise above it.
Sincerely,
Black Woman Blogging
P.S. Could you also get a consistent policy on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? If you don't support it, let it die, no matter how it gets killed.
P.P.S. Please tell Speaker Pelosi to man up . . . uh, I mean, woman up. As my mom used to say, "We all get knocked down in life. And you can lie there for a little while. But then you have to get back up." If she allows this defeat to keep her down, she's going to take a generation of future women leaders with her.
These People Look Familiar . . .
Oh, what a week it was. Judge Sotomayor is now Justice Sotomayor. Don't you love it? Laura Ling and Euna Lee were pardoned and returned home, thanks to President Bill "Big Dog" Clinton. (Note to President Clinton: I forgive you and Secretary Clinton for anything you did or said during the election that I found objectionable.) And Americans everywhere were voicing their opinions, loud and strong, against health care reform in town hall meetings.
But wait. Don't these angry town hall health care opponents look familiar to you? They look like the Tax Tea Party folks from earlier on this year, down to their very lack of racial diversity. Can't pick them out of a lineup, but they sure do look familiar.
My feeling is this: If they don't want health care reform, they should be able to opt out. Really. Sign a waiver saying that they are waiving their right to any government subsidized health care whatsoever -- the so-called "public option," as well as Medicaid and Medicare. We'll put a special designation on their social security numbers, and their federal income taxes will be reduced accordingly so that they're not paying for "socialized medicine."
But here's the catch: They don't get to change their minds.
If they fall on hard times as seniors and don't have health care provided through their former employers, well, tough nuggies. They have just given the hospital the right to roll their broke asses right out of the emergency room. Oh, but get off the gurney, 'cause the hospital is gonna need it for the insured folks.
Can't afford their statins, their Aricept, and other old age drugs on their pension-provided health care? Well, no federal supplemental program for them. They've just become their own damn "death panel." They'll need to choose between drugs and that cat food they're going to have to eat, since they probably opposed defined benefit pensions and cost-of-living increases, too.
Get dropped from their employers' insurance because it's too costly? Well, better find another employer, 'cause they like how that whole free market works anyway, right? That's how THEY roll.
And when their insurance companies deny coverage and they -- what? -- want to switch to the public option because it does provide coverage, well, they'll have to suck it up. They didn't want that ol' Nazi medical plan, right?
And don't even think about getting federal money for Viagra, which I think shouldn't be federally subsidized under any measure. A limp penis, although sad (even sadder if you're on the receiving end, but I wouldn't know nothin' 'bout that), is not life threatening.
Quite frankly, I want these familiar-looking and probably broke-ass citizens to opt out and waive federal coverage and any benefits of health care reform. They're probably the same ones who will turn around, have no coverage, and roll up to the emergency room of my HMO, driving up my rates. If they want to be non-covered health care lemmings, I say, let them walk right off that cliff. As for me, I'm willing to pay what it takes to get everyone covered and give the real "death panels" -- the insurance companies -- a run for their money by competition with the government. Because we do like competitive free markets, don't we?
But wait. Don't these angry town hall health care opponents look familiar to you? They look like the Tax Tea Party folks from earlier on this year, down to their very lack of racial diversity. Can't pick them out of a lineup, but they sure do look familiar.
My feeling is this: If they don't want health care reform, they should be able to opt out. Really. Sign a waiver saying that they are waiving their right to any government subsidized health care whatsoever -- the so-called "public option," as well as Medicaid and Medicare. We'll put a special designation on their social security numbers, and their federal income taxes will be reduced accordingly so that they're not paying for "socialized medicine."
But here's the catch: They don't get to change their minds.
If they fall on hard times as seniors and don't have health care provided through their former employers, well, tough nuggies. They have just given the hospital the right to roll their broke asses right out of the emergency room. Oh, but get off the gurney, 'cause the hospital is gonna need it for the insured folks.
Can't afford their statins, their Aricept, and other old age drugs on their pension-provided health care? Well, no federal supplemental program for them. They've just become their own damn "death panel." They'll need to choose between drugs and that cat food they're going to have to eat, since they probably opposed defined benefit pensions and cost-of-living increases, too.
Get dropped from their employers' insurance because it's too costly? Well, better find another employer, 'cause they like how that whole free market works anyway, right? That's how THEY roll.
And when their insurance companies deny coverage and they -- what? -- want to switch to the public option because it does provide coverage, well, they'll have to suck it up. They didn't want that ol' Nazi medical plan, right?
And don't even think about getting federal money for Viagra, which I think shouldn't be federally subsidized under any measure. A limp penis, although sad (even sadder if you're on the receiving end, but I wouldn't know nothin' 'bout that), is not life threatening.
Quite frankly, I want these familiar-looking and probably broke-ass citizens to opt out and waive federal coverage and any benefits of health care reform. They're probably the same ones who will turn around, have no coverage, and roll up to the emergency room of my HMO, driving up my rates. If they want to be non-covered health care lemmings, I say, let them walk right off that cliff. As for me, I'm willing to pay what it takes to get everyone covered and give the real "death panels" -- the insurance companies -- a run for their money by competition with the government. Because we do like competitive free markets, don't we?
Tax Protesters: Put Your Signs Down
I was walking back to my office when I saw the Tax Tea Party protest in front of the State Capitol in Sacramento. It looked like Woodstock for angry neo-cons. Many of the signs expressed sentiments that were anti-tax and anti-deficit. Too many of them expressed sentiments that were simply anti-Obama.
First, let’s define our terms. The national deficit is the amount of government spending that exceeds government revenues in any particular year. The national debt is the accumulation of all the past national deficits. As far as the national debt, to borrow from a familiar phrase, we didn’t get this far by President Obama alone.
Truth be told, many people who were participating in these tax protests had no business being out there. Many of the people who were out there have contributed, in one way or another, to the national debt and the current expected deficit. Let’s separate the wheat – the honest-to-goodness fiscal conservatives – from the chaff – the Obama haters. If you participated in any of the Tax Day Tea Parties, go ahead and grab your protest sign and continue reading to see which you are:
If you voted solely for Republican presidential candidates from President Reagan on, put your sign down. Reagan incurred huge national deficits, and on average, Republicans have incurred more national deficits than Democrats since Reagan. When Bill Clinton left office, he had a surplus to go with his articles of impeachment.
If you ever received a Pell grant, put your sign down.
If you were ever on welfare, put your sign down.
If you never wrote a letter to Congress about U.S. corporations moving their corporate headquarters to avoid paying federal corporate taxes, put your sign down.
If you supported the war in Iraq solely because you thought Saddam Hussein was a “bad man” and needed to go, put your sign down. There are many despotic world leaders who need to be deposed – Robert Mugabe, Fidel Castro, you name it -- but that’s no reason to go into debt.
If you continued to support the war in Iraq after it had been made abundantly clear that there were no WMDs or Al Qaida there at the time the war started, put your sign down. In fact, hit yourself on the head with your sign. Don’t worry – the damage has already been done because clearly your momma dropped you on your head when you were a baby.
If you didn’t make a peep of protest about the no-bid contracts to Blackwater and Halliburton, put your sign down.
If you are among the 95% of people who will benefit from the tax cuts proposed by President Obama or if you benefited from the Bush tax cuts, put your sign down. You can’t complain about a deficit or the national debt and pocket the change from a tax cut at the same time.
If you are collecting Social Security, put your sign down. Entitlement spending is the largest part of the federal budget. Yes, I know you paid into Social Security, but we all know Social Security is a big Ponzi scheme. Your money went to support the folks before you, and my money is going to support you. If you want to reduce the national debt, take up drinking and smoking, put down the Lipitor, and contract a quick-acting terminal disease.
If you are on Medicare or Medicaid and have an obesity- or smoking-related disease, put your sign down because that is totally within your control and you’re sucking up entitlement dollars. Grab a Nicorette, a carrot, and a Tae-Bo DVD and handle your business. Don’t tell me you can’t do Tae-Bo on a scooter.
If you’ve claimed tax deductions for your children, put your sign down. Unless your children were child actors or child prostitutes, they benefited more from federal expenditures than they contributed to the public fisc during their years as minors. I don’t think you should get a tax deduction just for being fertile and popping out a baby, especially if you’re the Octumom.
If you drive a gas-guzzling SUV or truck, put your sign down. We’re bailing out the auto industry because you continued to prop up a business model that was doomed to fail – vehicles reliant on low gas prices for sales in a nation that relies on other nations for its gas. If you drove a Hummer to the protest, hit yourself with the sign.
If you bought a house after 1999 that cost more than 3 times your gross income without a down payment and lost it due to foreclosure, put your sign down. You are so much a part of the problem, you shouldn’t have had the nerve to even show up. And you know you had no business buying that house. You were as wrong as the day is long.
By my count, that leaves about 3 protesters . . . .
First, let’s define our terms. The national deficit is the amount of government spending that exceeds government revenues in any particular year. The national debt is the accumulation of all the past national deficits. As far as the national debt, to borrow from a familiar phrase, we didn’t get this far by President Obama alone.
Truth be told, many people who were participating in these tax protests had no business being out there. Many of the people who were out there have contributed, in one way or another, to the national debt and the current expected deficit. Let’s separate the wheat – the honest-to-goodness fiscal conservatives – from the chaff – the Obama haters. If you participated in any of the Tax Day Tea Parties, go ahead and grab your protest sign and continue reading to see which you are:
If you voted solely for Republican presidential candidates from President Reagan on, put your sign down. Reagan incurred huge national deficits, and on average, Republicans have incurred more national deficits than Democrats since Reagan. When Bill Clinton left office, he had a surplus to go with his articles of impeachment.
If you ever received a Pell grant, put your sign down.
If you were ever on welfare, put your sign down.
If you never wrote a letter to Congress about U.S. corporations moving their corporate headquarters to avoid paying federal corporate taxes, put your sign down.
If you supported the war in Iraq solely because you thought Saddam Hussein was a “bad man” and needed to go, put your sign down. There are many despotic world leaders who need to be deposed – Robert Mugabe, Fidel Castro, you name it -- but that’s no reason to go into debt.
If you continued to support the war in Iraq after it had been made abundantly clear that there were no WMDs or Al Qaida there at the time the war started, put your sign down. In fact, hit yourself on the head with your sign. Don’t worry – the damage has already been done because clearly your momma dropped you on your head when you were a baby.
If you didn’t make a peep of protest about the no-bid contracts to Blackwater and Halliburton, put your sign down.
If you are among the 95% of people who will benefit from the tax cuts proposed by President Obama or if you benefited from the Bush tax cuts, put your sign down. You can’t complain about a deficit or the national debt and pocket the change from a tax cut at the same time.
If you are collecting Social Security, put your sign down. Entitlement spending is the largest part of the federal budget. Yes, I know you paid into Social Security, but we all know Social Security is a big Ponzi scheme. Your money went to support the folks before you, and my money is going to support you. If you want to reduce the national debt, take up drinking and smoking, put down the Lipitor, and contract a quick-acting terminal disease.
If you are on Medicare or Medicaid and have an obesity- or smoking-related disease, put your sign down because that is totally within your control and you’re sucking up entitlement dollars. Grab a Nicorette, a carrot, and a Tae-Bo DVD and handle your business. Don’t tell me you can’t do Tae-Bo on a scooter.
If you’ve claimed tax deductions for your children, put your sign down. Unless your children were child actors or child prostitutes, they benefited more from federal expenditures than they contributed to the public fisc during their years as minors. I don’t think you should get a tax deduction just for being fertile and popping out a baby, especially if you’re the Octumom.
If you drive a gas-guzzling SUV or truck, put your sign down. We’re bailing out the auto industry because you continued to prop up a business model that was doomed to fail – vehicles reliant on low gas prices for sales in a nation that relies on other nations for its gas. If you drove a Hummer to the protest, hit yourself with the sign.
If you bought a house after 1999 that cost more than 3 times your gross income without a down payment and lost it due to foreclosure, put your sign down. You are so much a part of the problem, you shouldn’t have had the nerve to even show up. And you know you had no business buying that house. You were as wrong as the day is long.
By my count, that leaves about 3 protesters . . . .
It's My Party and I'll Cry If I Want To
The Clintons redeemed themselves.
Hillary gave the speech of a lifetime and was the portrait of magnanimity by voicing her unequivocal, unconditional support for Barack Obama. By making the motion to nominate Senator Obama by acclaimation, she showed the nation's women how a real woman loses -- with grace, dignity, and pride.
President Bill Clinton, the DNC's prosecutor-in-chief, laid out, in no uncertain terms, the case against the Bush administration and the Republican party.
And Senator Obama reminded me why I am a Democrat and made me proud to be one once again. My love-hate relationship with the party is no secret. Today, I'm a born-again Democrat. Because I, too, believe we are a better nation than what we have been during the past eight years.
I had to work late last night, so I missed hearing Obama's acceptance speech live except for the last of it on NPR. So, snuggled up with a stack of reading from work and some Otter Pops (for the hot flashes), I watched the speech on CNN near midnight.
I am in awe. I knew Senator Obama was possessed of great oratorical and intellectual gifts, but as the young folks say, he broke it down -- he laid out in plain English what he's going to do and why we -- not just him -- are going to do it.
And he's so right -- the McCains of the world don't get it. His candidacy isn't about him; it's about us, everyday American citizens who can no longer stand by and watch our government serve the interests of those who don't have our best interests at heart.
When he reminded us, in language reminiscent of the Kennedys and Dr. King, that "we are better nation than this," it was all that I could do not to cry. He gave life to the feelings of everyday Americans like myself.
So, today, I'm fired up and ready to go. I will be hosting a phone banking event at my home -- tentatively titled, "Burgers and Beer for Barack" -- and will do what I can to get as many people registered to vote as possible.
Why? Because I'm a Democrat. A proud Democrat. A Democrat who was almost brought to tears when she was reminded by Senator Obama of what my party and my nation can be.
Because it's my Party and I'll cry if I want to.
Hillary gave the speech of a lifetime and was the portrait of magnanimity by voicing her unequivocal, unconditional support for Barack Obama. By making the motion to nominate Senator Obama by acclaimation, she showed the nation's women how a real woman loses -- with grace, dignity, and pride.
President Bill Clinton, the DNC's prosecutor-in-chief, laid out, in no uncertain terms, the case against the Bush administration and the Republican party.
And Senator Obama reminded me why I am a Democrat and made me proud to be one once again. My love-hate relationship with the party is no secret. Today, I'm a born-again Democrat. Because I, too, believe we are a better nation than what we have been during the past eight years.
I had to work late last night, so I missed hearing Obama's acceptance speech live except for the last of it on NPR. So, snuggled up with a stack of reading from work and some Otter Pops (for the hot flashes), I watched the speech on CNN near midnight.
I am in awe. I knew Senator Obama was possessed of great oratorical and intellectual gifts, but as the young folks say, he broke it down -- he laid out in plain English what he's going to do and why we -- not just him -- are going to do it.
And he's so right -- the McCains of the world don't get it. His candidacy isn't about him; it's about us, everyday American citizens who can no longer stand by and watch our government serve the interests of those who don't have our best interests at heart.
When he reminded us, in language reminiscent of the Kennedys and Dr. King, that "we are better nation than this," it was all that I could do not to cry. He gave life to the feelings of everyday Americans like myself.
So, today, I'm fired up and ready to go. I will be hosting a phone banking event at my home -- tentatively titled, "Burgers and Beer for Barack" -- and will do what I can to get as many people registered to vote as possible.
Why? Because I'm a Democrat. A proud Democrat. A Democrat who was almost brought to tears when she was reminded by Senator Obama of what my party and my nation can be.
Because it's my Party and I'll cry if I want to.
Obama Victorious
Despite all the mud that was slung, despite trite little debate zingers such as “change we can Xerox,” despite facing the might and heft of a decades-old political machine, Senator Barack Obama claimed victory and the mantle of leadership for the Democratic Party going into this year’s presidential election.
Now I won’t have to vote for McCain, despite the fact that the Michigan and Florida delegations were partially seated -- seated despite the fact that both states’ delegations were to be sanctioned because their state parties moved up their primaries. Ooh wee, when the Democratic Party leadership threatens sanctions, we now know that even the sanctions are negotiable.
It would be too easy to do a victory dance, to laugh off Bill Clinton’s latest efforts to lay blame for a post-presidential bimbo eruption at the feet of the Obama campaign, and to dismiss Hillary in search of a much more likeable female vice presidential candidate – Janet Napolitano, anyone?
But I have to admit – I think Obama needs to put Hillary on the ticket. To keep the peace, unify the party, and move forward.
I know he probably doesn’t trust her as far as he could throw her. But such mismatched presidential pairings aren’t new. Kennedy supposedly wasn’t fond of Johnson, Eisenhower wasn’t fond of Nixon, and Roosevelt wasn’t fond of Truman. Sometimes ya gots to do what ya gots to do. Besides, despite the Clintons’ profound inability to “get off the stage,” so to speak, I think they and the sizeable brain trust to which they have access should be put to work in getting the nation back on track. Put Hillary back to work on healthcare. Make Bill the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. or special envoy to Iraq. Let them do what they appear to do best – solve problems and shine. What harm will it do? Heck, I’d even consider Hillary for the next spot on the U.S. Supreme Court if I were Obama. It would get her out of the cabinet and out of his hair. Plus, the job pays more than that of Senator or Vice President, and it’s a lifetime appointment in D.C. You know the Clintons love them some D.C.
Despite my misgivings about Hill and Bill, I don’t think they can or should be easily dismissed from playing a role in the next administration. As far as the party goes, well, they’re kinda like, well, family. Creepy family, but family nonetheless.
Now I won’t have to vote for McCain, despite the fact that the Michigan and Florida delegations were partially seated -- seated despite the fact that both states’ delegations were to be sanctioned because their state parties moved up their primaries. Ooh wee, when the Democratic Party leadership threatens sanctions, we now know that even the sanctions are negotiable.
It would be too easy to do a victory dance, to laugh off Bill Clinton’s latest efforts to lay blame for a post-presidential bimbo eruption at the feet of the Obama campaign, and to dismiss Hillary in search of a much more likeable female vice presidential candidate – Janet Napolitano, anyone?
But I have to admit – I think Obama needs to put Hillary on the ticket. To keep the peace, unify the party, and move forward.
I know he probably doesn’t trust her as far as he could throw her. But such mismatched presidential pairings aren’t new. Kennedy supposedly wasn’t fond of Johnson, Eisenhower wasn’t fond of Nixon, and Roosevelt wasn’t fond of Truman. Sometimes ya gots to do what ya gots to do. Besides, despite the Clintons’ profound inability to “get off the stage,” so to speak, I think they and the sizeable brain trust to which they have access should be put to work in getting the nation back on track. Put Hillary back to work on healthcare. Make Bill the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. or special envoy to Iraq. Let them do what they appear to do best – solve problems and shine. What harm will it do? Heck, I’d even consider Hillary for the next spot on the U.S. Supreme Court if I were Obama. It would get her out of the cabinet and out of his hair. Plus, the job pays more than that of Senator or Vice President, and it’s a lifetime appointment in D.C. You know the Clintons love them some D.C.
Despite my misgivings about Hill and Bill, I don’t think they can or should be easily dismissed from playing a role in the next administration. As far as the party goes, well, they’re kinda like, well, family. Creepy family, but family nonetheless.
This Is A Chance, This Is A Chance
This is a chance
This is a chance
Dance your way
Out of your constrictions
“One Nation Under A Groove,” Funkadelics
I knew it would happen sooner or later. I wondered how long the Democratic Primary could continue without facing the issue of race and how it shapes us and our experiences. For some reason, in the good ol’ U.S. of A., discussions of race are tantamount to discussing one’s salary, religion, or porn preferences. Senator Obama got caught at the intersection (crosshairs?) of race and religion, and he turned it back on America: Hey, we all do and say things that are racist.
Yeah, like I’m sure Bill Clinton has objected every time he heard some white southerner use the N-word.
But I’m glad it happened. Now we’re free to really talk about it – the fact that, yes, Barack Obama experiences this country differently –as do most African Americans – because we ARE African American. This is a chance to really talk about race and the fact that African Americans are no less American, no less patriotic, for pointing out racial inequities that occur even to this day -- Geraldine Ferraro, anyone? Was Michelle Obama any less an American, any less patriotic, when she pointed out that this was the first time in her adult life that she was proud of this country? Heck, my dad is an 82 year-old World War II vet, and I’m sure that the Obama campaign is the first time he’s been proud of this country in his adult life. Coming from the Depression-era Jim Crow south and serving in a racialized military, this country hasn’t given him much to be proud of. We’re rife with hypocrisy – sending black men to fight in the European theater to end facism, only to have them come home and have to fight for the same freedom they helped secure for whites abroad. The American experience is not monolithic, and there’s a lot to not be proud of. And saying so doesn’t make any of us less American or any less patriotic. The white race-free experience is not the only one.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s sermon, looped interminably on YouTube, opens the door to having this frank conversation. And we shouldn’t fear it. It is an opportunity to “dance our way out of our constrictions,” i.e., the false construct that race doesn’t and shouldn’t matter and that to discuss race is to create differences instead of just acknowledging them. The only times in my life when I have been free of dealing with the race thing is when I’ve been somewhere where blacks are in the majority and I could pass for as long as I kept my mouth shut – Jamaica, Bahamas, St. Lucia.
Think about the irony of all this. Now everyone wants to know exactly what goes on in black churches. One white woman commented yesterday on NPR that she didn't feel welcome in the Black church (BTW, there are many black churches -- Baptist, Church of God in Christ, Catholic, African Methodist Episcopal, Apostolic, even African Orthodox Church of Saint John Coltrane -- but I digress). But we didn’t create black churches per se. Black churches were all that we were allowed to have because we weren’t allowed to worship with whites in this country at its inception. Where whites created subordination, now they see subversion. How rich is that?
And if you really want to know what happens in black churches, attend one. As the pastor who performed my wedding ceremony, Rev. Harris, said, “Black people spend more time in church than white folks because we have more issues to work out.” True that. When you consistently occupy the subordinate position in society, when you are constantly defined as “the other” and “what not to be,” when you are consistently shown the back hand of the law, well, if that doesn’t put you at the altar on a regular basis as a Black person, you’re probably self-medicating or in denial.
As I used to say when I lived in Mississippi, “Jesus saves, because white folks don’t even have a clue that the only thing keeping black folks from beating them down when the do and say racist things IS Jesus.”
Can I say that and not be a racist? Can we at least have the discussion without me being called a racist or less patriotic?
And now that we have race on the table, so to speak, memo to the Obama campaign: Now that you can’t deny the role of race in America and in this campaign, can we please change the campaign theme song to “One Nation Under A Groove”? Because even with our embedded racism, sexism, classism and other isms, at the end of the day, we are, with all our flaws, still just one nation.
Besides, I can’t help but smile when I think of a President Obama ending his first press conference with the line, “Giving you more of what you’re funkin’ for . . . “ Might be too much to hope for.
To quote another great George Clinton song, “Free you mind, and your ass will follow.”
This is a chance
Dance your way
Out of your constrictions
“One Nation Under A Groove,” Funkadelics
I knew it would happen sooner or later. I wondered how long the Democratic Primary could continue without facing the issue of race and how it shapes us and our experiences. For some reason, in the good ol’ U.S. of A., discussions of race are tantamount to discussing one’s salary, religion, or porn preferences. Senator Obama got caught at the intersection (crosshairs?) of race and religion, and he turned it back on America: Hey, we all do and say things that are racist.
Yeah, like I’m sure Bill Clinton has objected every time he heard some white southerner use the N-word.
But I’m glad it happened. Now we’re free to really talk about it – the fact that, yes, Barack Obama experiences this country differently –as do most African Americans – because we ARE African American. This is a chance to really talk about race and the fact that African Americans are no less American, no less patriotic, for pointing out racial inequities that occur even to this day -- Geraldine Ferraro, anyone? Was Michelle Obama any less an American, any less patriotic, when she pointed out that this was the first time in her adult life that she was proud of this country? Heck, my dad is an 82 year-old World War II vet, and I’m sure that the Obama campaign is the first time he’s been proud of this country in his adult life. Coming from the Depression-era Jim Crow south and serving in a racialized military, this country hasn’t given him much to be proud of. We’re rife with hypocrisy – sending black men to fight in the European theater to end facism, only to have them come home and have to fight for the same freedom they helped secure for whites abroad. The American experience is not monolithic, and there’s a lot to not be proud of. And saying so doesn’t make any of us less American or any less patriotic. The white race-free experience is not the only one.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s sermon, looped interminably on YouTube, opens the door to having this frank conversation. And we shouldn’t fear it. It is an opportunity to “dance our way out of our constrictions,” i.e., the false construct that race doesn’t and shouldn’t matter and that to discuss race is to create differences instead of just acknowledging them. The only times in my life when I have been free of dealing with the race thing is when I’ve been somewhere where blacks are in the majority and I could pass for as long as I kept my mouth shut – Jamaica, Bahamas, St. Lucia.
Think about the irony of all this. Now everyone wants to know exactly what goes on in black churches. One white woman commented yesterday on NPR that she didn't feel welcome in the Black church (BTW, there are many black churches -- Baptist, Church of God in Christ, Catholic, African Methodist Episcopal, Apostolic, even African Orthodox Church of Saint John Coltrane -- but I digress). But we didn’t create black churches per se. Black churches were all that we were allowed to have because we weren’t allowed to worship with whites in this country at its inception. Where whites created subordination, now they see subversion. How rich is that?
And if you really want to know what happens in black churches, attend one. As the pastor who performed my wedding ceremony, Rev. Harris, said, “Black people spend more time in church than white folks because we have more issues to work out.” True that. When you consistently occupy the subordinate position in society, when you are constantly defined as “the other” and “what not to be,” when you are consistently shown the back hand of the law, well, if that doesn’t put you at the altar on a regular basis as a Black person, you’re probably self-medicating or in denial.
As I used to say when I lived in Mississippi, “Jesus saves, because white folks don’t even have a clue that the only thing keeping black folks from beating them down when the do and say racist things IS Jesus.”
Can I say that and not be a racist? Can we at least have the discussion without me being called a racist or less patriotic?
And now that we have race on the table, so to speak, memo to the Obama campaign: Now that you can’t deny the role of race in America and in this campaign, can we please change the campaign theme song to “One Nation Under A Groove”? Because even with our embedded racism, sexism, classism and other isms, at the end of the day, we are, with all our flaws, still just one nation.
Besides, I can’t help but smile when I think of a President Obama ending his first press conference with the line, “Giving you more of what you’re funkin’ for . . . “ Might be too much to hope for.
To quote another great George Clinton song, “Free you mind, and your ass will follow.”
Feeling Obamalicious
Yep, today is Super Tuesday – or rather, Super Duper Tuesday or Fat Tuesday if you’re in New Orleans or Mobile – and I’m feeling Obamalicious.
Yep, even in California, I like Obama’s chances. He doesn’t have to win all of the Latino vote – just pick off enough and continue to do as well with independents and black voters such that there will still be a Democratic primary to speak of after today.
I’ve got my Obama lawn sign up – no one stole it yet – and I’m still reeling from the unprecedented turnout of African American women who made up thirty-five percent of the voters in the South Carolina Democratic primary, where eighty-one percent of the black vote went to Obama.
And I’m still in awe of the Obamaudacity of the young voters who continue to turn out, do phone banking, and make their hope tangible. I applaud you. You’re the reason why I decided to support Obama in the first place.
As I discussed with BMNB, I don’t think Hillary gets how her words and actions play out. This is the year of integrity and intelligence, and, IMHO, candidates who don’t have both won’t make it. I’m not a Southerner, but I lived there long enough to know that Hillary’s abrupt departure from South Carolina – before the polls closed and without even making a public speech there to thank supporters – probably wasn’t received well. Her departure was the functional equivalent of saying, “NEXT!,” as if South Carolina didn’t matter. Well, respect and decorum do matter in the South.
If she wins the nomination, she’ll have to come back through there again. Hmm.
And her remark on Letterman – “In my White House, people will know who wears the pant suit in the family” – hmm, probably not received well in dress country, i.e. the South.
At this point, both Bill and Hill seem a little disingenuous, a little manipulative (what with Bill putting his foot in his mouth in his remarks comparing Obama’s successes to the putative ones of Jesse Jackson). A little lacking in, oh, what is it? Oh yes -- integrity.
So, I’m feeling a bit Obamalicious. Let’s see if my fellow California voters back me up.
Yep, even in California, I like Obama’s chances. He doesn’t have to win all of the Latino vote – just pick off enough and continue to do as well with independents and black voters such that there will still be a Democratic primary to speak of after today.
I’ve got my Obama lawn sign up – no one stole it yet – and I’m still reeling from the unprecedented turnout of African American women who made up thirty-five percent of the voters in the South Carolina Democratic primary, where eighty-one percent of the black vote went to Obama.
And I’m still in awe of the Obamaudacity of the young voters who continue to turn out, do phone banking, and make their hope tangible. I applaud you. You’re the reason why I decided to support Obama in the first place.
As I discussed with BMNB, I don’t think Hillary gets how her words and actions play out. This is the year of integrity and intelligence, and, IMHO, candidates who don’t have both won’t make it. I’m not a Southerner, but I lived there long enough to know that Hillary’s abrupt departure from South Carolina – before the polls closed and without even making a public speech there to thank supporters – probably wasn’t received well. Her departure was the functional equivalent of saying, “NEXT!,” as if South Carolina didn’t matter. Well, respect and decorum do matter in the South.
If she wins the nomination, she’ll have to come back through there again. Hmm.
And her remark on Letterman – “In my White House, people will know who wears the pant suit in the family” – hmm, probably not received well in dress country, i.e. the South.
At this point, both Bill and Hill seem a little disingenuous, a little manipulative (what with Bill putting his foot in his mouth in his remarks comparing Obama’s successes to the putative ones of Jesse Jackson). A little lacking in, oh, what is it? Oh yes -- integrity.
So, I’m feeling a bit Obamalicious. Let’s see if my fellow California voters back me up.
Obamaudacity
Obamaudacity: The possibly irrationally exuberant belief that Barack Obama's candidacy will energize young voters, sweeping him into the White House and causing Generations X and Y to take ownership of their country.
Yes, I've been on the fence for a long time regarding what has now become the Obama/Clinton /Edwards race, partly because none of them was my first choice. Long before his movie won an Academcy Award and he shared a Nobel Prize, I had hoped that Al Gore would take all his newfound populist energy and fame and make a final run at the White House. It was not to be, but I held out hope.
But now we're getting down to the wire, and I feel like I have to choose. And, given my choices, I've come down with a mild case of Obamaudacity, for a variety of reasons.
First, I'm not a Hillary hater, but I can kinda understand those who are. I would love to see a woman in the White House as someone other than the First Lady, but I'm not certain whether Hillary is that woman. I don't think the Hillary folks truly recognize how much of the African American community's fondness for Bill is manifested as grace toward Hillary. And, as much as Bill Clinton did, most likely with Hillary's help, to increase the number of African American federal judges and to appoint African Americans to his cabinet, I'm still smarting over the Clintons' treatment of Lani Guinier. Remember her? The nominee for head of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice? I hated the way she was made out to be some "quota queen." Trust me, I had to read some of her academic writings in law school, and she wasn't nearly as radical as she was made out to be. What I hated more was that the Clintons didn't defend her and she wasn't allowed to defend herself. But God and Kharma worked it all out -- she made history as the first African American woman tenured professor at Harvard Law School. But it still left an image of the Clintons in my mind as a couple that turns tail on their friends at the whiff of controversy or confrontation.
The other reason I'm not feeling Hillary is that her candidacy reminds me of the same old tired political tactics that the candidates use first to inflict harm on their party brethren and then to inflict harm on the other party's candidate. Her swipes at Barack Obama's inexperience ring hollow for me. First, I love that Obama has grassroots political experience from actually working to organize everyday people to vote. Second, her backhanded remark to the effect that spending part of one's childhood in a foreign country doesn't count as foreign policy experience lends itself to some irony and doesn't exactly ring true. If that is indeed the case, then sleeping with the president doesn't equate to foreign policy experience, either; otherwise, Monica Lewinsky would be more than qualified to be Secretary of State. She did, after all, overhear President Clinton talking to Arafat while she was in flagrante fellatio.
And, as someone who actually did live in a foreign country, albeit for a short time during college, I would beg to differ with her assessment. I studied in Spain as a college student during the Reagan years, when the dollar was at an all time high. I learned first hand the effect of U.S. monetary and foreign policy on other nations. For instance, I never understood why, when I went to the bank to change my dollars into pesetas, that I was treated with disdain. One of my Spanish classmates explained it to me curtly: "Don't you get it? Oil is bought in dollars. It's winter, and the dollar is high compared to the peseta. That means that a lot of poor people in this country won't be able to afford to heat their homes. And you come walking in the bank, exchanging dollars like they're nothing. Of course they hate you."
Talk about foreign/economic policy 101. If Obama gained even a scintilla of an other-worldly perspective on the effects of U.S. foreign and economic policy on other countries, or even an understanding of how non-Americans regard this nation, he will have brought far more of worth into the White House than its current occupant. Plus, if I haven't learned anything else from the likes of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, I've learned this: Don't confuse experience with wisdom.
Finally, I've got Obamaudacity because of my experience teaching young people. When I taught law students, the one thing I noticed was that very few of the black law students I met were registered Democrats. Those who were registered to vote at all were primarily Independents. They didn't feel any Roosevelt/Kennedy/Clinton loyalty to the Democratic party. And they were largely apathetic, suffering from "political party fatigue." Yet, it is this very group that has the most to lose if they are not politically energized and engaged. They're Gen X and Gen Y, so that means they're going to get the sloppy seconds of the Baby Boom generation -- sloppy environment, sloppy Social Security, sloppy economy, sloppy deficit, sloppy never-ending war in Iraq, sloppy immigration policy, sloppy everything. Basically, we Baby Boomers are going to leave these young folks to clean up our mess. They might as well get started now and have a say in who is going to help them do it. And if Obama is their choice, then, as someone in the tail end of the Baby Boom generation, I want to honor their choice. To them, I imagine, he represents a clean slate unsullied by past scandals, support for the war in Iraq, and the same recycled political hacks from both parties.
I know Baby Boomers won't let go of Rolling Stones concerts -- hell, some of us would still be following the Grateful Dead if Jerry Garcia were alive -- as well as smoking doobies, endless self-improvement, and flagrant conspicuous consumption. But maybe, just maybe, we need to cede to the choices of the generations behind us. Maybe we need a case of Obamaudacity.
Yes, I've been on the fence for a long time regarding what has now become the Obama/Clinton /Edwards race, partly because none of them was my first choice. Long before his movie won an Academcy Award and he shared a Nobel Prize, I had hoped that Al Gore would take all his newfound populist energy and fame and make a final run at the White House. It was not to be, but I held out hope.
But now we're getting down to the wire, and I feel like I have to choose. And, given my choices, I've come down with a mild case of Obamaudacity, for a variety of reasons.
First, I'm not a Hillary hater, but I can kinda understand those who are. I would love to see a woman in the White House as someone other than the First Lady, but I'm not certain whether Hillary is that woman. I don't think the Hillary folks truly recognize how much of the African American community's fondness for Bill is manifested as grace toward Hillary. And, as much as Bill Clinton did, most likely with Hillary's help, to increase the number of African American federal judges and to appoint African Americans to his cabinet, I'm still smarting over the Clintons' treatment of Lani Guinier. Remember her? The nominee for head of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice? I hated the way she was made out to be some "quota queen." Trust me, I had to read some of her academic writings in law school, and she wasn't nearly as radical as she was made out to be. What I hated more was that the Clintons didn't defend her and she wasn't allowed to defend herself. But God and Kharma worked it all out -- she made history as the first African American woman tenured professor at Harvard Law School. But it still left an image of the Clintons in my mind as a couple that turns tail on their friends at the whiff of controversy or confrontation.
The other reason I'm not feeling Hillary is that her candidacy reminds me of the same old tired political tactics that the candidates use first to inflict harm on their party brethren and then to inflict harm on the other party's candidate. Her swipes at Barack Obama's inexperience ring hollow for me. First, I love that Obama has grassroots political experience from actually working to organize everyday people to vote. Second, her backhanded remark to the effect that spending part of one's childhood in a foreign country doesn't count as foreign policy experience lends itself to some irony and doesn't exactly ring true. If that is indeed the case, then sleeping with the president doesn't equate to foreign policy experience, either; otherwise, Monica Lewinsky would be more than qualified to be Secretary of State. She did, after all, overhear President Clinton talking to Arafat while she was in flagrante fellatio.
And, as someone who actually did live in a foreign country, albeit for a short time during college, I would beg to differ with her assessment. I studied in Spain as a college student during the Reagan years, when the dollar was at an all time high. I learned first hand the effect of U.S. monetary and foreign policy on other nations. For instance, I never understood why, when I went to the bank to change my dollars into pesetas, that I was treated with disdain. One of my Spanish classmates explained it to me curtly: "Don't you get it? Oil is bought in dollars. It's winter, and the dollar is high compared to the peseta. That means that a lot of poor people in this country won't be able to afford to heat their homes. And you come walking in the bank, exchanging dollars like they're nothing. Of course they hate you."
Talk about foreign/economic policy 101. If Obama gained even a scintilla of an other-worldly perspective on the effects of U.S. foreign and economic policy on other countries, or even an understanding of how non-Americans regard this nation, he will have brought far more of worth into the White House than its current occupant. Plus, if I haven't learned anything else from the likes of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, I've learned this: Don't confuse experience with wisdom.
Finally, I've got Obamaudacity because of my experience teaching young people. When I taught law students, the one thing I noticed was that very few of the black law students I met were registered Democrats. Those who were registered to vote at all were primarily Independents. They didn't feel any Roosevelt/Kennedy/Clinton loyalty to the Democratic party. And they were largely apathetic, suffering from "political party fatigue." Yet, it is this very group that has the most to lose if they are not politically energized and engaged. They're Gen X and Gen Y, so that means they're going to get the sloppy seconds of the Baby Boom generation -- sloppy environment, sloppy Social Security, sloppy economy, sloppy deficit, sloppy never-ending war in Iraq, sloppy immigration policy, sloppy everything. Basically, we Baby Boomers are going to leave these young folks to clean up our mess. They might as well get started now and have a say in who is going to help them do it. And if Obama is their choice, then, as someone in the tail end of the Baby Boom generation, I want to honor their choice. To them, I imagine, he represents a clean slate unsullied by past scandals, support for the war in Iraq, and the same recycled political hacks from both parties.
I know Baby Boomers won't let go of Rolling Stones concerts -- hell, some of us would still be following the Grateful Dead if Jerry Garcia were alive -- as well as smoking doobies, endless self-improvement, and flagrant conspicuous consumption. But maybe, just maybe, we need to cede to the choices of the generations behind us. Maybe we need a case of Obamaudacity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)