Bring It On! Election 2008

and I’ve read some pretty unconvincing arguments on the web but this one’s a doozy! It’s by a member of Senator and presidential hopeful, Barak Obama’s Church who is a professor of theology at the University of Chicago and it is in defense of the sermons by retired pastor Jeremiah Wright. Now it’s entirely possible that there’s much more to professor Dwight Hopkins’ defense of what appears for all the world to be racist hate and divisive rhetoric and idiotic conspiracy thorizing on Rev. Wright’s part, but what we get in this ABC report is laughable (well, I laughed anyway):

Church member and University of Chicago theology professor Dwight Hopkins says Wright’s message has been taken out of context.

“The whole point to Dr. Wright’s sermons is to how do you make America a better America. If anything he’s a true patriot,” Hopkins said.

He also argues that the furor surrounding Wright smacks of a general attack against the idea of a black church born during slavery.

“It [let us try to remember that by “it”, professor Hopkins is talking about sermons containing “God Damn America!”, “the U. S. of KKK A”, “We created the AIDS virus for the genocide of people of color”, “The chickens came home to roost” on 9/11 and on and on; remember this as you try to keep back the laughter –Editor] tries to be a healing balm in the midst of some very challenging situations in the inner city and ghettos,” Hopkins said. “If we took a field trip to a thousand black churches across the country on Sunday, you would have a very serious wake-up call on the nature of those messages.”

Yes. I can see how rhetoric like that would start riots on a weekly basis make America a better place and incite hatred against whites and America be just like a healing balm. Or, as an alternative theory, professor, how about this: such preachers are hateful, racist, lunatics and you just can’t tell the difference. Your theory may come from a professor at a prestigeous university but, listening to those sermons, I think mine’s closer to the mark.

In any case, if Wright’s sermons are intended to make a better America and act as a healing balm, they are dismal failures in that role. Seriously, only someone who’s been listening to that crap week in and week out and then isolating himself in some ivory tower of Post-Colonialist, Black Victimization Theology could regard those sermons as balm intended to make America better. Listening to them makes me hate…imagine what it makes those who listen to it week in and week out over years feel. “Mmmmm! Feel the balm!”

The good professor has a bumper-sticker on his car that reads, “Hate America For Her Own Good!” In smaller print below that it reads, “It’s the patriotic thing to do!” [For those wondering, that part about the bumper-sticker is satire on my part. It’s not as funny as the professor’s defense of Rev. Wright’s particular brand of hate speech but then, I’m not a professor of religion at the University of Chicago. Apparently they’re a hoot!]

The bold-faced audacity of Obama to think for one minute that he is where he is because of his intellect, his education and his hard work..its(slaps forehead) because he is a black man! Why the fuck didn’t I think of that!..Geraldine did howevav..I hate that I have to even consider taking sides in this fight. Who is more put-upon..a Woman or an African-American? I have said from the get-go that between the two Democratic candidates, I do not have a horse in this race. Neither of these candidates are progressive my dear reader.
I feel that there is very little difference between the programs offered up by HRC and Obama. What differs is the person behind the campaign and the message.

What changed for me is Geraldine Ferraro’s comments the last two days. WTF is she trying to say? Is she saying women are less discriminated against than African-Americans or the opposite because at this point..its hard to say. Is she saying that because Obama is both an African-American and a male, he has no idea what it’s like to be discriminated against just as a woman? Because if the truth be told..

Both women and people of color are discriminated against here in these United States of America. It’s a fucking fact jack. Both are held to a different standard and both are treated as second-class citizens. But back to Geraldine and her sick point of view..

For Ms. Ferraro, a former female candidate for the office of Vice President, to say Obama was getting a ‘gimme’ based solely on his color and sex.. I am fucking pissed beyond recognition my dear reader. As a brown bitch I know both types of bigotry and discrimination..that as a woman and a minority. Lets, just to be clear, revisit what Ms. Ferraro said:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

There it is..one can not pretend what was said..there it is in black and fucking white..ironically so my dear reader.

What pisses me off beyond words is that Ms. Ferraro makes color and sex an issue all by herself.. Her words are divisive in an important contest where we do not need to do that to ourselves..the Republican’s will do it to us all by themselves when both parties choose their candidates and the final race for President starts in earnest. The Republicans will fling the dirt and make race or sex an issue..you can take that to the fucking bank my dear reader.

In essence..Ms. Ferraro did the heavy lifting for the Republicans. And Hillary isn’t discrediting her words. Hillary isn’t disavowing her bullshit and bravado. And I am so fucking pissed.I could spit nails.

Ms. Ferraro didn’t make this about qualifications..she made it about something that shouldn’t matter in this day and age..she made it about the color of someone’s skin or their gender..or as she so eloquently put it..both.

What pisses me off is that women and minorities are fighting against each other in her world. In my world we all stand together to fight this narrow-minded bullshit. As a woman of color, the color brown, I know what the hell it’s like to fight both of these friggin battles..make no mistake about that my dear reader.

Geraldine Ferraro does not. Lets not make any mistake about that. She is a privileged white woman. Instead of making this a campaign about issues and how each candidate will deal with them..for whatever reason and perhaps on purpose, she changed the subject and made it about something that really doesn’t have a damn thing to do with the job of running our nation.

So when Geraldine Ferraro says that people are discriminating against her and her fuckwitted statement because she is a women..I call bullshit on that crap here and now. She is using the tried and true battle cry of the Republicans..reverse discrimination. Kiss my brown female ass Geraldine. Twice even. This campaign does not need any more divisiveness..no bitch, it does not, especially from the inside of the Democratic party.

If her candidate is so weak that she needs to make the case for gender bias coupled with racial bias..then bitch..we got a problem. But she is not contributing to the ‘conversation’ by pointing her tired-ass finger at Obama for being a Black Male as the reason that her candidate is sucking pond scum at this point and using all types of dirty tricks to turn the tide.

I am sicker by the minute of the methods Hillary and her minions, which of course include Geraldine Ferraro, are using to attempt to turn the tide in her favor. Ms. Ferraro is so full of shit at this point, her eyes better be brown. She is making statements that will only harm the Democratic candidate in the fall…because when it’s all said and done Geraldine..

Your a racist and a misogynistic bag of shit in my humble brown bitch opinion. The only thing you care about at this point..is to make sure HRC wins..at all costs.

And Lady Ferraro..the cost is too high if we allow you to spew your garbage and get away with it. So I for one, am calling bullshit on your bullshit here and now.

Update..here is Ms. Geraldine on Fox Noise..some one tell this woman to stfu please!

Crossposted with brown female pride at Sirens Chronicles and UnCapitalist Journal
Tags: Geraldine Ferraro, Racism, Misogyny

“I think you’ll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say.“He’s never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002.” - Hillary Clinton before the Texas and Ohio primaries.

And with that comment, Hillary Clinton proclaimed to the nation that if she can’t have the presidential nomination then the whole Democratic party might as well just vote Republican, because if the choice ends up being between McCain and Obama, well then Hillary thinks that four more years of Bush-like policies are A-OK for America.

Sounds like Hillary has Joe Lieberman for an advisor. If the Democrats don’t give you what is obviously rightfully yours to take, then the hell with them! Better to side with the law-breaking, torture loving, warmongering, Bush GOP than actually listen to the people of this country when they tell you that they prefer someone else for the top job.

Of course, when Hillary makes statements like the one above, it only highlights why so many Democrats-and so many Americans of all political flavors-have thrown their support behind Barack Obama. We don’t want a president who thinks that decades of experience in a crooked political system is a plus. We don’t want another president who refuses to acknowledge the reality of a situation, who thinks that she should just get her way because, by golly, it’s her turn and she’s due. We don’t want another imperialistic attitude sitting in the Oval Office, pretending that things will only be better with her in charge, that no one else (save the opposition party nominee) can quite handle the task. We don’t want another presidential election that boils down to a choice between bad and worse. And this time, we actually have a chance to change those dynamics by giving the nomination to Obama.

But for Hillary the equation is a different one altogether. For Hillary, the question isn’t who can better help to end corruption in government or who can give America back her reputation in the world or even who will inspire Americans to get back to building a better country and world. Nope, for Hillary the only question is “How can I win this thing?” And in answering that question, she shows that for her, winning is the only thing that matters.

Debate after debate has proven to voters that on many domestic issues, both Clinton and Obama share similar goals, varying mostly in the details of policy than in the necessity of movement. But under the surface is where the differences lie, and voters have figured out that where Obama seeks to empower us all, Hillary simply seeks power for its own sake-and for her own sense of personal destiny.

Since falling behind Obama in the delegate count, Hillary has pulled out all the stops to paint Obama as unprepared for the task of being president, hoping that by highlighting his so-called “inexperience” that voters will flock under her banner. It simply hasn’t worked. Even her primary victories in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island were slim victories and weren’t enough to even narrow the gap in the delegate count. But what Hillary seems to ignore at this stage of the game is the fact that many, many Republicans are less than satisfied with McCain as their nominee. These GOPers are now watching the Democratic race and asking themselves a serious question-could they vote for a Democrat? For many, if the candidate is Hillary the answer in a resounding “NO.” But if it is Obama, there are many who will jump ship and vote for a Democrat. At least they would if the vote was held today. But if Hillary-who they will never vote for in the general election-continues to portray Obama as a weak choice for Democrats, she is also hurting him for the general election and giving McCain a better shot of winning the prize. For someone who claims to despise the Bush Administration, stumping (even discreetly) for the GOP nominee who puts forth ambitions not so unlike those of Bush seems an odd way of telling voters that they should pick you. Especially Democratic voters who would rather sit in a pit of vipers than give the White House to another Bush-like contender.

Michael Gerson said it well in this Washington Post article:

“Though it is increasingly unlikely, Clinton may still have a path to the nomination — and what a path it is. She merely has to puncture the balloon of Democratic idealism; sully the character of a good man; feed racial tensions within her party; then eke out a win with the support of unelected superdelegates, thwarting the hopes of millions of new voters who would see an inspiring young man defeated by backroom arm-twisting and arcane party rules.”

Indeed. And what a presidential path to victory that is.

But as she keeps on campaigning against Obama, she keeps highlighting her own presidential unworthiness by trying to paint Obama as some untested, incapable hack who showed up at the last minute and fooled us all into taking away what was and should be hers and hers alone.

Like when she tried to throw light on a land purchase Obama made. Obama acknowledged that the deal was a bad idea and has taken responsibility for his actions. He’s not denying the mistake, not battling to have records hidden. And yet for Hillary Clinton, years were spent examining a little land deal called Whitewater, years which she fought and fought to keep the whole thing under wraps.

And this whole “experience” thing is a real laugh too, especially if you look back to the 1992 campaign of her husband. Bill Clinton was so overmatched by the senior George Bush when it came to government service and experience that the Clinton’s had to portray his candidacy around a different theme- something they called “change.” Funny how what seemed such a good idea in 1992 (and was a good idea by the way) is now some kind of harbinger of failure if Obama wins the nomination. And let’s be real here- Hillary isn’t all that much more “experienced” at being president that anyone else who has never been president.

And then there is Hillary’s tendency towards secrecy. In a move that likely inspired Dick Cheney’s own energy meetings, Hillary has yet to fully release the documents related to her own health care meetings in the early 1990’s. She has yet to release her income tax returns even though Obama has done so and even though when running for Senate in 2000 she screamed about how her opponent didn’t release his returns. A small bit of hypocrisy that reveals a lot about the candidate herself.

And now her latest flop is with regards to the Florida and Michigan primaries-she “won” both events, despite a pledge not to campaign and now wants those delegates added to her tally. Of course, she and all the other candidates knew well in advance that those states’ delegates were not going to count because of some disagreement with the DNC and the stat Democratic parties. Obama (and the others still in the race at the time) followed the rules and stayed out of the states, in Michigan no name but Hillary even appeared on the ballot. But now that she is losing what is rightfully hers, she wants to change the game and get those delegates in. Tell me again how Hillary would be a different, better president that Bush? After all, lying and cheating and ignoring the rules doesn’t seem to have made this country a better place in the last eight years.

And for goodness sakes, I’m not even mentioning her many corporate ties that make her incapable of legislating purely for her constituents, or her support for the war in Iraq, or her willingness to ignore the massive abuses of law perpetrated by Team Bush.

All grace and honorable when she was the presumed “inevitable” nominee, Hillary Clinton coming in second isn’t such a noble character. I suspect though that this is a more true representation of who Hillary Clinton really is, and of who she would be as president of this country.

And these are just some more reasons why I support Barack Obama.

(cross posted at Common Sense)

From my email today:

John McCain may try to claim that the past careers of his advisers are irrelevant, but look at this passage from today’s Washington Post article about Charlie Black, McCain adviser and chairman of lobbying firm BKSH and Associates…
But even as Black provide a private voice and a public face for McCain, he also leads his lobbying firm, which offers corporate interests and foreign governments the promise of access to the most powerful lawmakers. Some of those companies have interests before the Senate and, in particular, McCain’s Commerce Committee.

Black said he does a lot of his work by telephone from McCain’s Straight Talk Express bus.

John McCain literally has a lobbyist for “corporate interests and foreign governments” working from the “Straight Talk Express.”

Where will they work from if he wins the White House?  — Howard Dean

Same corrupt crap, different package.

If you’ve been following the news in the past year, you’ve probably noticed how completely useless our new Democratic “leaders” have been. And you were probably wondering: is this something calculated; some sort of sick variation on Good Cop Bad Cop? Or are the Democrats really this timid and scared shitless of their own shadows?

Well, wonder no more. It’s a scam. (Hope you’ll read this whole article by Matt Taibbi; and preferably bookmark it. It’ll piss you off, but we need to know this.) We’ve been had. And with all due respect to that song by The Who, we probably WILL get fooled again. And again and again…

The Democrats have made a conscious decision NOT to focus on getting us out of Iraq. Instead, they’re focusing all of their time and energy on defeating Republicans in the upcoming election. I would’ve thought that getting us out of Iraq (since that was the reason we ELECTED them!) would be the best way to win the ’08 election, but what do I know?

Harry Reid actually came out and said that he can’t fit Iraq into his busy schedule. “Sorry about those 4,000 dead American soldiers. I’ll get back to you on that We have the presidential election. Our time is really squeezed.”

And Nancy Pelosi actually said — this is no joke! — that she’s putting Iraq on hold until 2009, because by then “we’ll have a new president. And I do think at that time we’ll take a fresh look at it.” Whoa! Stand back! She’s planning to “take a fresh look at it.” OOOOOOHHH!!! Talk about somebody who jumps right in there and grabs the bull by the horns.

But the most infuriating thing about this whole charade is the fact that it’s so calculated and devious. They’re pulling the same sleight-of-hand tricks over and over. They don’t want to solve any problems. Fuck no, they want to keep the Iraqi war and all the rest of Bush’s scandals front and center so they can keep campaigning against them. “Goddammit, this time we’re really gonna stand up and say NO to Iraqmire / waterboarding / the Patriot ACT / the Military Commissions Act / telecom immunity…oh darn, we lost again. But by golly we sure tried.”

An aide to one anti-war House member said: “It was all about the public show. Reid and Pelosi would say they were taking this tough stand against Bush, but if you actually looked at what they were sending to a vote, it was like Swiss cheese. Full of holes.”

He also said: “Can you imagine Tom DeLay and Denny Hastert taking no for an answer the way Reid and Pelosi did on Iraq? They’d find a way to get the votes. They’d get it done somehow.”

Lynn Woolsey and Barbara Lee are two Democrats who are fed up with Reid and Pelosi. Woolsey said: “If we’d been bold the minute we got control of the House — and that’s why we got the majority, because the people of this country wanted us out of Iraq — if we’d been bold, even if we lost the votes, we would have gained our voice.”

The article says: “Before the 2006 elections, Democrats told us we could expect more specifics on their war plans after Election Day…and now they are once again telling us to wait until after an election to see real action to stop the war.” Film at eleven.

Matt Taibbi ends the article with: “Just get it done. Because if you don’t, sooner or later this con is going to run dry. It may not be in ‘08, but it’ll be soon. Even Americans can’t be fooled forever.”