Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Maggie Williams and sub-prime lending...Clinton campaign honcho in the crosshairs... And I ain't gonna hate on Maggie's job no more...

I ain't gonna hate on Maggie's job no more... Nor should you.

Unlike Samantha Power, I won't apologize for calling Hillary Clinton a monster. Just to prove the point, let me do it again now. Hillary Clinton is a monster. No apology forthcoming.

My point? I am virulently anti-Hillary. I am biased. I'm so biased, in fact, that I truly believe Hillary Clinton causes cancer of the human soul.

So, you're probably guessing I'm sporting political wood over the "breaking news" that Maggie Williams, Clinton confidant and campaign manager, has some strong ties to the very sub-prime mortgage industry Hillary has been criticizing day after day. I'm loving every minute of this egregious act of Clintonian hypocrisy, right?

Wrong. I'm not aroused. I'm not on the attack. If you don't like The Monster, find something else to gripe about. At least for now. This Maggie Williams thing, as currently reported, is a non-issue.

For those with better things to do than browse news headlines while watching the Washington Nationals (side note for DC fans: it is a very bad sign when you're ace is Odalis Perez, even if you do win), a quick recap of subprimegate is probably in order.

Maggie Williams is running the Clinton campaign. Maggie Williams, a long-time Clinton associate and PR guru, served on the board of directors at Delta Financial Corp. for about 7 years. Delta is one of those sub-prime lenders everyone hates these days. You know, the ones we're all blaming for the recession and those nasty foreclosures? Maggie made about $200K plus a heaping pile of now-worthless Delta stock in exchange for her guidance and advice. Delta is now bankrupt.

The Clinton campaign manager was intimately involved with a nefarious sub-prime lender! Why, oh why, am I not using this fact as a means of attacking Hillary? Why is John Brown, the guy who'd eat shit and vote for McCain to avoid a Hillary White House, taking it easy on HRC?

Here are 5 reasons why attacking Hillary based on Williams doesn't make sense to me...

Maggie isn't Hillary. Maggie works for Hillary. That's it. The transitive property of political bullshittery, where we pretend everything those around a candidate do can somehow be used to impugn the candidate is baloney. Maggie did her own thing. Part of that thing involved working for Delta. That doesn't prove Hillary loves subprime lenders or that her calls for regulation aren't sincerely motivated. Please note that I'm not agreeing with The Monster. I'm just not questioning her sincerity based on the actions of Williams.

No evidence of wrongdoing. Even if you do play the "your person is dirty, thus you are dirty" game, which I again reject, there's no dirt here. Being involved with Delta doesn't mean you supported everything that happened there. It doesn't mean you even knew or needed to know everything while you were there. The role of directors varies with the operation and there's no evidence to suggest that Maggie Williams sat around a table with a bunch of evil super-villains and plotted ways to screw the Joneses out of their money and homes. None.

Evidence of good. Williams, based on the accounts I've read, was called in to help Delta do a better job with respect to meeting legal requirements and responding to problems. Additionally, I have no reason to doubt Williams' own comments about the sub-prime industry. She saw wider latitude in loan decisions as a means by which those in lower income groups could get a decent shot at home ownership. She perceived Delta's home equity loans as a way for middle and lower class people to survive financial hardships and to improve their circumstances. Now, we can doubt the wisdom of her judgment, but there's no reason to question her motives. Many people felt the exact same way and not all of them were evil bastards. The reason so many people are getting screwed as this house of cards collapses is because so many smart people like Williams didn't see it coming and believed that looser lending made sense.

Bigger fish to fry. I can think of at least 238,300,121 reasons to attack The Monster that don't involve Maggie Williams. Over 72% of those reason are far more significant than Maggie Williams' links to Delta. Time is a finite resource for mortals. If we feel a need to spend some of our precious time berating Hillary, we should use it where it counts.

Tit for tat, ad infinitum. Roasting candidates because their friends and allies did foolish things creates an infinite loop of stupidity. Those who'll look to the Williams story as a way of turning the tables on those who knocked Obama over Wright merely set the table for the other guys to bag on Barack because of something someone involved in his campaign did. In turn, someone in BHO land will find something not to like about another Hillary backer. We've seen this shit happen over and over again in the last several months. Now is a fine time to take a stand against it. Even those blinded with rage at Hillary can occasionally take the high ground.

I'm always a fan of uncovering new and exciting reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton. I'm going to pass on subprimegate, though. Unless something extraordinary develops, I think it's a non-starter. I will, however, use the Maggie Williams controversy as an excuse to play some Bob Dylan. Maggie's Farm.



Bookmark


Technorati Tags: Del.icio.us Tags: Furl Tags:

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Taste the doom... Jesus, imaginary combat and Bill Clinton's semen... We suck...

As we watch Hillary Clinton slowly, but surely lose her bid to run as the Democratic nominee for the presidency, things keeping getting dumber. Here are three low-lights from the past few days...

The former Iowa chair for Obama got pissed off at Bill Clinton's campaign tactics on behalf of his wife, The Monster. Gordon Fischer invoked Monica's blue dress, stating that Bill's remarks were a "stain on his legacy, much worse, much deeper than the one on Monica's blue dress." Any time someone mentions Clinton cum, a media firestorm reignites.

That's right, it's over ten years after Moncia slobbed knob and we're still talking about Bill Clinton's semen.

Former Clinton strategist and Skeletor-looking shit-slinger James Carville decided that Bill Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama was an act of political disloyalty.

He made his point over the Easter weekend, comparing Gov. Richardson to Judas. For you heathens out there, Judas is the dude who sold out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. Bill Richardson = Saviour Killer. Carville ain't sorry. He thinks he hit a home run on the Judas thing.

Hillary Clinton described a risky landing in war-torn Bosnia. Sniper fire, running (heads low) to the "base". It was the kind of shit that apparently would pass with some dummies as foreign policy experience (if it were true). Oh, but it came from The Monster's mouth. It isn't true. Not even close.

Hanging out with Sinbad on a plane, shaking a few hands, accepting a present from some random Bosnian kid, and smiling like crazy doesn't sound much like the dangerous mission Hillary described from the stump with a "I'm so fucking full of myself I could explode at any moment" look on her face.

She lied. Dangerous mission = bullshit. Now, the campaign is trying to cobble together some sort of explanation for the whole fib. Not compelling.

Meanwhile... Just in case you missed it. We hit the 4,000 mark for U.S. deaths in Iraq and we are going to have to choose between leaving the place or sticking it out as the number climbs. The economy seems to be hinting that we may very well be in an actual recession. China is laying the smack down in Tibet, Medvedev is grumbling about NATO expansion, and a host of other important things that don't involve Bill Clinton's semen are happening.

Barack Obama mentioned "silly season" in one of the debates, referring to our tendency to discuss matters of triviality and to focus on "gotchas" during campaigns. Silly season is in full-swing. An Obama guy, a Clinton guy, and another lie. Nero, bust out the motherfuckin' fiddle.

Oh, and I don't blame Fischer, Carville and The Monster. Not really. In a perfect world, no one would get into a lather over Fischer's semen reference. In a perfect world, we'd roll our eyes at the Crazy Cajun. In a perfect world, no one would particularly curious about fish stories involving a trip with Sinbad, a kid and Sheryl Crow from twelve years ago.

So, do I blame the media? Do I hate them for feeding me this shit day after day while real issues go completely ignored? A little. Mainly, I hate you. Yeah, you. And me. The collective "we". We ask for this shit. We eat it up. We watch. We read. They know it. If a real discussion about a serious issue could draw an audience that would attract those car advertisements, we'd be watching smart people talking about smart things.

We prefer silly season. Thus, we deserve our punishment. We deserve the insult of constant exposure to the simplistic and foolish. We deserve the consequences of an uninformed citizenry. We deserve these days and, just to borrow a line re-popularized in the wake of Jeremiah Wright, our chickens will eventually come home to roost.

We suck.

Bookmark



Technorati Tags: Del.icio.us Tags: Furl Tags:

Friday, March 21, 2008

Obama, Wright and RELIGION... Whoops, we've sort of skipped that one... Why understanding Obama/Wright may not have THAT much to do with race...

Millions upon millions of words have been uttered or typed about Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama. We've dissected Wright's statements. We've parsed every word Barack Obama has said about the man. We've examined its impact on elections.

We've talked about white guilt, black bias, generational differences and their correlation to perspectives on racial equality, black vs. brown, black vs. women, Martin Luther King, Malcom X, Sister Souljah, Jesse Jackson, Bill Clinton on Arsenio fuckin' Hall and when someone finally tore the last "coloreds only" water fountain from a wall in Mississippi.

Racist this and racist that. Inequality, history, bigotry and "do you think Obama could sufficiently distance himself from Wright if he called him a black-robed Klansman and proceeded to beat the shit out him with a lead pipe--if, and this is an important 'if'--the pipe was painted red, white and blue?"

We're a nation obsessed with race because a black candidate belongs to a church that had a preacher who yelled "GOD DAMN AMERICA!" and who unleashed a verbal shit-storm in whitey's direction. Racism, reverse racism, how could anyone possibly go to a church where someone isn't preaching racial harmony the "nice" way? "I'm offended, I'm impressed, I'm confused, I'm worried that Barack might put Louis Farrakhan on a postage stamp if he wins."

Barack gave the race speech. It was pretty good and it made a lot of sense. Now it's the Greatest Speech Ever Given by Anyone in the Whole Wide History of All Things. Either that or it's the Dumbest Pile of Crap Ever Spoken in the History of the Universe. Some say it was Another Example of Smooth Vote-Grabbing Technique and others argue the speech as nothing short of An Unnecessary Comment on an Issue Better Left Alone Forever.

Obama's speech was less than an hour long, if I remember correctly. If you added up all of the reaction pieces to it and read them aloud, you could fillibuster the Senate long enough to kill every civil rights bill ever passed. Strom Thurmond wouldn't have needed the phone books. I mention Strommy-Boy intentionally. Because I'm obsessed with race issues right now.

I went stopped at a 7-11 this morning for a Big Gulp and there was a black kid putting gas in his Toyota. I couldn't stop staring. I couldn't stop thinking about the black experience, white privilege, if he'd worry my grandma and what they might be saying at his secret black church when white guys like me aren't around.

Last night, I fell into a weird self-induced palsy. I was listening to Public Enemy's "Fight the Power" while reading Ann Coulter's criticism of Obama's speech. I just started vibrating.

God damn YOU, Jeremiah Wright! God damn YOU for opening this can of worms! Thanks to your little outbursts, I have to think and write about race very god-damned day! Why can't we just go back to the way it was before Jeremiah Wright showed up on YouTube? Why can't we go back to those carefree days of yestermonth, when America wasn't a nation so racially divided?

Thanks to Jeremiah and Barack, we have been forced to examine race from every perspective with the kind of intensity and acumen only available to us during Presidential elections. In other words, we get to turn it into a bizarre game played by TV talking heads. (Why won't CNN issue scorecards for home viewers and some kind of system to distribute points? Bob says Buchanan is winning by 2, but I have Gergen up by 3!)

We want to know about Barack Obama. Therefore, we must know about Jeremiah Wright. Thus, we must come to terms with race.

I think a good discussion on race makes sense. It's probably overdue. However, I don't think it's the best way to understand the Wright/Obama relationship. Before we begin investigating the possible race-based motives behind the hacking of Obama's passport info (current odds are 7:1 that the State Dept. employees are white lackeys of The Man), I think it's critical to mention one little thing.

The Wright/Obama thing isn't really a race thing.

No, I'm not kidding. Yes, it is partially about race. You can even say it's 50% about race, although I think that's generous. If you strip away pure politicking, the Obama/Wright mess is really, in very large measure, about religion.

Our reaction has been, predominantly, focused on race. That, kids, is a mistake. An error in judgment. It's the "good television" issue and it avoids the very real third rail of religion.

We didn't get lucky. We couldn't have just one of the R's on the table. We have to deal with religion, too. I'm not just talking about this whole "black church" notion, either. That falls back on the race side of the discussion.

Wright's stupidity may be about race, but Obama's relationship to Wright is a matter of religion. It's about the way different people approach faith and their relationships to churches and church leaders.

Before I went race crazy, I sort of touched on some of this. Since then, I've been shocked. The race frenzy has been amazing to behold, but no one is really talking about religion and how different people approach their faiths. This is at the CORE of determining the significance of the Obama/Wright relationship and it is being IGNORED.

I really am amazed. So many people think the relationship between Barry O. and Jerry W. is a critical aspect of understanding a potential POTUS and his outlook on the world, but no one is talking about that pastor/congregate relationship in terms of Barack Obama and HIS religion.

I'm not talking about "his" faith in terms of Christianity (notice how that "secret Muslim" shit has disappeared?). I'm talking about Barack Obama and HIS relationship to the faith of Christianity, and to his particular church.

Many people are aghast that Obama would belong to a church that had a pastor who said crazy shit. They can't figure it out! They can't understand WHY anyone would go to a church that consistently offered perspectives that are so out of the mainstream!

I mean, really. Would you go to a church for 20 years if you had to listen to someone tell you that you could only have sex if it was for procreation and that birth control was sinful? Would you worship somewhere that taught you that members of your faith were the only chosen people who could expect a happy afterlife? Would you go to some crazy church where pastors told you it was important to nuke Iran in order to usher in the return of Jesus?

Would you keep on going to some church where the pastor told you that your gay cousin was going to burn in hell for all eternity because pictures of Brad Pitt raise his steeple?

How could anyone spend 20 years in a church that's been populated by numerous pedophiles in positions of authority?!? How could any sane person maintain membership in a church that preaches the destruction of a competing religion through whatever means necessary--including violence--Sunday after Sunday?

Hmmm... People do that. Week after week. Why?

Well, there are a few reasons. And a lot of it might be the same reason Barack continued to hang out in a church led by some guy who was jumping around hollering "God damn America!"

Now, if you're Dick Morris, you argue that Obama's involvement with Trinity was purely pragmatic. Jeremiah Wright's church has big influence on the south side of Chicago, so Barack found an empty pew. It was political networking from a young organizer and future politician who recognized the non-supernatural powers of Trinity.

I'm sure Obama considered the positive mojo that was coming his way by virtue of membership at Trinity United. He ain't stupid, after all. However, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm ready to accept his explanation of how he came to be a member of the church.

Even more importantly, I believe his explanation of his relationship to religion. In his own words:

And in time, I came to see faith as more than just a comfort to the weary or a hedge against death, but rather as an active, palpable agent in the world and in my own life.

It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity one day and affirm my Christian faith. It came about as a choice and not an epiphany. I didn’t fall out in church, as folks sometimes do. The questions I had didn’t magically disappear. The skeptical bent of my mind didn’t suddenly vanish. But kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt I heard God’s spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to his will, and dedicated myself to discovering his truth and carrying out his works.

Just in case you skipped over that, read it again. Carefully. This is Barack Obama explaining his Christianity. His individual relationship to the concept of faith and to the church. This is Barack Obama explaining why we should be looking at the Wright controversy in terms of religion instead of perseverating on race to the exclusion of all other considerations.

Today, on the way to work, I was driving across an overpass that spans a busy chunk of interstate highway. There was a guy standing there on the little fence-protected sidewalk. He was carrying a large wooden cross. He wanted every car headed westbound on I-435 to see the holy cross on Good Friday. That guy has a certain outlook on religion. He has a relationship to his faith. It's wildly different than my own. It might be different than yours. It's probably different than Barack Obama's.

There are stalwarts and true believers in every denomination. There are Catholics who never miss a mass and who make confession (and follow through with penance) regularly. There are Jews who really do keep kosher every single day. Some of them listen to every word their pastor, rabbi, or priest says and accept it as True. There are those who listen to those same leaders and funnel it through their own faith and understanding. There are those who listen and then storm out of church or temple, fuming.

Then, there are those who don't fall into the hardcore category. They have faith, but they have questions and they aren't necessarily willing to compromise their sense of reason and right because someone at the pulpit says so. They share much in common with the stalwarts who believe there is a difference between the voice at the pulpit and the voice of God.

There are cafeteria Catholics who get birth control prescriptions filled and who'll skip mass for the Steelers/Browns game. There are Jews who occasionally have a cheeseburger. There are fundamentalists who don't really buy into the whole "speaking in tongues" thing and who don't have a problem with a "gay lifestyle" even if their denomination's hierarchy says they should.

Then, there are those who don't belong to a specific church or denomination but share beliefs common to one or more. Then, there are the atheists. And the pagans. And the neo-paganistic druids. And the agnostics. Fuck the agnostics.

I don't want to argue about who's right and who's wrong (Except with respect to the agnostics. They're just narcissistic and/or cowards). I don't want to compare the merits of one outlook to another. I just want it recognized that one person's understanding of religion may be radically different than that of another.

Barack Obama doesn't sound like someone who believes his church has all the answers. By his own admission, he still has questions. He's still looking for answers. His Christianity isn't an exercise in gathering and following absolute political truths from his pastor. He's not there to follow the instructions of Jeremiah Wright to a tee.

He's just like the people who keep going to John Hagee's church even though Hagee is certifiably nuts. He's not unlike the Rod Parsley congregates who keep showing up every Sunday even though they have their doubts about the miracle healing prayer cloths he sells to the desperate.

Would you keep going to a church if you don't believe in everything the church leaders say? If you go to church every week, you probably are doing just that. You might be one of the stalwarts who never disagrees, but the odds are that you don't necessarily put the words of the person at the pulpit on par with the word of God.

Put simply, Barack's religious convictions aren't altogether different than those held by many others. It just so happens that his pastor is a little more fucked in the head than most of the other ones holding services on the weekends. Isn't there something in the bible about casting stones? There are few thousand people who might want to look that up, based on what I've seen lately.

Aha, you may say, there is a difference. The mellowly-presented anti-birth control stance of the Catholic Church isn't quite as radical as "God damn America". There's a difference between a biblical stance against hot girl on girl lesbian action and "the chickens have come home to roost". The protestant pastors who seem to have some questionable viewpoints aren't quite as "out there" as Uncle Jeremiah. It's not right to compare Wright to Billy Graham. It makes more sense to compare him to Fred Phelps.

People say they can understand someone sitting through sermons with which they may have minor disagreements but that they can't believe Barack Obama would nod along with Jeremiah Wright for many years. Most people, they argue, wouldn't keep going to a church that preached white supremacy or that consistently supported some other completely reprehensible world view. Why would Barack hang out with Jeremiah spouting all that nonsense?

That's an interesting argument. It's also one of the more sensible. Where do we draw the line between church statements that are tolerably questionable and those that are utterly reprehensible. Does damning the gays fall on one side of the line while "God damn America" falls on the other?

I do have an opinion about why we're drawing the line in a spot that puts Jeremiah Wright on the wrong side while leaving Pat Robertson in the clear.

Culturally, we're a lot more accepting, in political and social terms, of crazy clergy who keep their preachin' on the conservative side. That's a natural byproduct of our nation's history and traditional religious biases. When Barry Goldwater's progeny married the children of the religious right, U.S. culture sort of collectively decided to let some brands of crazy slide a little more.

There's another factor at play, too. We're suffering from a lack of context. Jeremiah Wright has been preaching and speaking for decades. I doubt he's gone more than 48 hours in the last 20 years without giving a presentation or preaching a sermon. We've seen nothing but excerpts. Snippets of the guy at his very worst. Based on what I know, Trinity United and Jeremiah Wright have done a lot of good things in Chicago. That doesn't excuse the lunacy, but it might help put it into perspective.

There may be enough good in that church to justify repeat visits even if some days are batshit crazy. The church may function as a community that's diverse enough to accept the idea that members can disagree with a pastor's politics.

(Not to get back on race again, but there is also a difference in how the majority interpret the behavior and commentary of black churches vs. those of white churches.)

But this isn't just about politics any more than it's just about race. Their both factors, but focusing on them at the exclusion of the individual religious experience itself is foolish.

I'm not a traditionally religious guy. We'll have an Easter egg hunt at the John Brown estate and the loveable giant bunny will make his presence known, but I won't be attending services. Just for this post, I decided to be a non-heathen for a few minutes and I dug this up in the bible. I thought it was pertinent, considering Hillary Clinton's White House ambitions... In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. Paul wrote:

As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

By the way, I just tossed that out there because I couldn't bear the thought of writing a long post like this without finding some way to piss off Hillary Clinton supporters.

Have a happy and/or soulful Easter.

Save an egg for John Brown!


Bookmark



Technorati Tags: Del.icio.us Tags: Furl Tags:

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Why Geraldine Ferraro should go away...

Go away, Geraldine. Not because you're a racist or anything. Go away because you've gone sour and are bad for everyone.

I know you watched it and have probably read it again, too. Play along with me, though. I want you to read an excerpt from Barack Obama's "race" speech. You don't have to study every word carefully. Just read it and pay a little attention, okay? Great. Thanks. Here we go:

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

See? I told you it wasn't complicated! Very easy to understand, actually.

For those who need extra help with interpretation, allow me:

It is wrong to simply dismiss everyone who says something controversial about race as a crazed racist. That kind of simplification is silly and its not very helpful.

Just in case you need even more extra help, I'll simplify again:

We shouldn't call people racists every time they say something about race. That is bad.

Still having problems? Okay:

No call everyone racist. Bad.

That last "level of help" was written with Geraldine Ferraro in mind. I used to think of Ferraro as a relatively harmless relic from the Democratic party's bygone days. She had a landmark moment, served her constituency, and moved on. The end. I didn't dislike her and I certainly admired her willingness to be the first woman VP candidate. Beyond that, I didn't really think too much about Geraldine Ferraro.

I now realize that Geraldine Ferraro is a fucking moron of the first order. She is stupid. She lacks reading comprehension skills. She is a fool. I think you get the idea.

Wait! How can it be that this woman, a former vice presidential candidate, can be a complete dumb-ass? It seems impossible! How could an elected official with a long track record in Washington, DC be functionally illiterate?

I don't know. I really don't. But that's exactly what's going on with Geraldine Ferraro. Well, either that or she really isn't stupid and she's just saying stupid things for the sake of some political objective. I'd rather believe she's a Grade-A dummy than to think she's a conniving piece of shit, though. Wouldn't you?

Any way, she's either stupid or full of crap. We know that because she recently reacted to Obama's speech.

Just in case you've lost track, revisit the comment he made that referenced Geraldine. He said it was wrong for people to simply dismiss Ferraro as a bigot. He said that throwing people overboard on the basis of comments about race was short-sighted and foolish. He basically told the people who called Geraldine Ferraro a racist to stick it up their asses. Barack Obama stuck up for Geraldine Ferraro and cautioned those who'd call her a racist because of her "Barack is lucky to be a black dude" comments.

So, how do you think Geraldine Ferraro reacted? Do you think she thanked Obama for recognizing that she wasn't a racist? Do you think she applauded his willingness to explore what her comments and motivations really meant, instead of painting her as a crazed bigot?

Hell no. Geraldine Ferraro did exactly what you'd expect an idiot who can't understand simple sentences would do. Or, you could say she did exactly what you'd expect a sick, twisted political manipulator would do.

She became indignant!

To equate what I said with what this racist bigot has said from the pulpit is unbelievable...


It also didn't happen. Nonetheless, that's what Geraldine told the now-halfway-famous Daily Breeze. She was pissed off that he somehow equated her remarks with Wright's yammerings. So what if he didn't actually do that. So what if he did something approximating the opposite of what seemed to piss her off. She's either too stupid to understand Barack Obama or she's intentionally faking rage to serve some other end.

Either way, she sucks. Big time. She's pure evil and her reaction to the speech is far more sinister and malignant than her earlier fool-talk about Obama's luck at being a black guy running for president.

Geraldine Ferraro mind has rotted. Or her political soul has gone rancid. You pick. I don't give a shit. Either way, she's bad.

The funny thing is that I sort of stuck up for Geraldine after her controversial remarks made headlines. I reasoned that her comments were less a product of racism than of her own involvement in women's issues and the context-built prism through which she might view the world. I thought she was wrong, but I didn't think she was a racist.

Well, no more sticking up for Ferraro. She is infected with either the stupid bug or the most dangerous political disease imaginable.

The latest round of Ferraro vs. Obama is sickening. Geraldine is pissed off at Obama for doing the opposite of what he did. That's bad enough. She's also hacked that he failed to criticize Jeremiah Wright.

Yeah, you read that right. She's all hacked off that Barack didn't come down on the pastor. Here's an example of her fucked up (non)insight:

(Obama) gave a very good speech on race relations, but he did not address the fact that this man is up there spewing hatred...

WTF Gerry? Does this ring a bell?

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.


Apparently, Barack Obama must kill Jeremiah Wright, urinate on his corpse and then go on SNL and tear up a photo of him after singing a capella in order to "address" the matter to Geraldine's satisfaction. Fight the real enemy, Barack! What a load of shit. She's either beyond stupid or she's faking. We all know it.


And it really comes as no surprise. The "lucky black guy" stuff was followed by Geraldine making these weird accusations that they Obama campaign was calling her a racist. Of course, that never happened. They called her remarks "divisive" and "polarizing" but they never categorized the comments as "racist". They certainly didn't call Gerry a racist. That reality didn't phase her, though. She claimed it was true anyway. Then, Obama says that those who did call her a racist were wrong. That pisses her off even more, apparently. Idiot or liar. Your pick.

I guess there's a third choice--psychopath. I don't know which of the three options best fits Geraldine Ferraro, but I do know one thing. America better damn well be done with folks like her. Otherwise, we deserve every bad thing that comes our way.

If you want to know what a new politics should look like... If you're really interested in bettering the USA and its governance... If you want to know why people seem to love the idea of "change" and why hope is an increasingly popular antidote to the status quo... If you want to do any of those things, you can figure it all out by studying Geraldine Ferraro's behavior over the course of the past month.

She is bad. End of story.

Go away, Geraldine. Not because you're a racist or anything. Go away because you've gone sour and are bad for everyone.


Bookmark


Technorati Tags: Del.icio.us Tags: Furl Tags:

Solving the Florida & Michigan delegate problem... Obama, hand 'em over to Hillary... Winners know when fighting isn't worth the effort...

Dear Barack Obama,

I have solved the Democratic delegate crisis of 2008. I have crafted an elegant solution to handling both the Michigan and Florida delegations. My solution will not cost the states, parties or candidates anything. My solution will not require a re-vote. The John Brown solution fixes the whole mess instantly.

Just give Hillary what she wants.

Seriously. He should let her have her precious little phony Florida and Michigan victories and move on to bigger and better things. Like winning the nomination without them.

You aren't going to need them. You've done the math. Just hand 'em over with a smile. Explain your preference for focusing on bigger national issues and America's well-being, as opposed to intra-party bickering.

If you're playing one-on-one with someone and you're whipping them, there's no reason to worry about cutting them some slack when they travel or claim BS fouls. You're gonna win either way, you might as well silence the whining in the process.

Plus, there are other advantages to the John Brown plan. How many superdelegates are gonna screw the gracious guy? Who's going to back Hillary into winning when she's only marginally close because you were the bigger person? No one.

You'll go from being the leader to the presumed nominee immediately. Oh, and the Jeremiah Wright thing will disappear for at least two weeks' worth of news cycles.

Give her Florida and Michigan. Everyone will know she doesn't deserve them. They'll count in her favor on paper, but they'll weigh her down with negative karma.

If you do it just right, she'll look like shit and you'll be the champ. The trick is in the presentation, but I think you can handle it. Hand 'em over and tell her to meet you in Denver if she plans on dragging this mess out until then.

Then, stop talking about her. Period. Make her a ghost at the debates and don't utter her name again until you toss some love her way during your acceptance speech. Your only opponent right now is John McCain.

READER EXERCISE: Consider the proposition "John Brown is just kidding about giving Florida and Michigan to Hillary". Mentally outline reasons why this proposition may or may not be true. Determine whether he is joking or serious. Explain your conclusion.

Bookmark


Technorati Tags: Flickr Tags: Furl Tags:

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Clinton vs. Obama and racism arguments... You ain't seen nothing yet... Wait until it's Obama vs. McCain...

I'm really interested in how the Geraldine Ferraro/race thing sorts itself out. Not because I'm really all that concerned about the phantom racism of old white women who just happen to have stopped reading and thinking about feminism before all of the race/gender intersection scholarship and activism blew up old-school "woman is the nigger of the world" thinking.

My interest is more future-oriented. I want to see how this plays out because, when it comes to race, you ain't seen nothing yet.

If you think the Democratic primaries have started to reveal some lingering issues of race in the U.S., just wait until Barack Obama squares off against John McCain down the road. That's when the shit will really hit the fan.

Whereas Geraldine Ferraro is just a very frustrated warrior clinging to a dying vision of feminism, John McCain has a track record that makes her comments look incredibly trivial.

McCain voted against making Martin Luther King, Jr. Day a national holiday.

McCain hired Terry Nelson, the guy who put together the anti-Harold Ford ad that many decried as racist.

McCain had a dust-up over the use of the expression "tar baby".

McCain raised money for George Wallace's kid, a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, an organization on the Souther Poverty Law Center's hate group list. The CCC celebrates America's "European heritage" and takes offense to things like mixed marriages.

McCain has that "I'll always hate the gooks" thing going for him. Yeah, he says "gooks".

McCain was "honored" when John Hagee, he of the "slave sale" fund raisers, provided an endorsement.

McCain hired Richard Quinn, founder of "Southern Heritage", a guy who called Nelson Mandela a terrorist and blamed Martin Luther King, Jr., for creating perpetual dependence upon welfare among blacks.

Etc.

By the way, I don't think all of those criticisms prove John McCain is a bigot or anything. Some of them are weird, some are probably accidents, some are stupid. Some really are disturbing, but more in a "this guy has questionable judgment" way than in a "John McCain hates people" way.

However, this undoubtedly sets the stage for some race-related fireworks. Then, there's the traditional tension between blacks and the Republicans. You also have media "personalities" who will probably end up in McCain's corner who are certain to raise hackles and you can bet that at least a handful of surrogates will say stupid things--they always do (on both sides, by the way). The Republicans are sufficiently aware of that risk that they're already engaging in some prevention activities.

If Bill Clinton's allusion to Jesse Jackson when discussing Obama can make headlines and the frustrated grumblings of Geraldine Ferraro can trump Eliot Sptizer humping a whore in the press, you have to wonder what's going to happen with Obama vs. McCain.

That's why the reaction to the Ferraro babble interests me. It might be a sneak preview of things to come.

It'll be interesting to see how that plays out, huh?

Bookmark


Technorati Tags: Del.icio.us Tags: Furl Tags: