Archive for April 11th, 2008
Funny ‘documentary’ on Fox News (by the Daily Show)
Of course it’s a comedy show, but humor is a vehicle for truth. I watch Fox News more than I should, but I recognize all of its faults. It is in no way Fair and Balanced. Most of the time I flip between news stations to see who is covering what at any given time. I’m always interested when they cover completely different stories with the “Breaking News” graphic on the screen. If either one were so important it should be on all networks, but often I find you have to watch everything to get the truth about anything, and even then…you still need YouTube.
Here is part one, my favorite words are “eloquent and visionary”. And part two…
McCain’s going to woo the black vote…in South Philly?
The New York Times reported on April 4th that Senator McCain plans to criss-cross the states in order to woo the black vote. He’ll have to do a lot more research if he wants to know exactly where to woo that vote. This man truly doesn’t have any concept of who we are as a nation.
“I know that I’m not going to get a majority of the African-American vote,” Mr. McCain said last week in a radio interview on ‘The Tavis Smiley Show’. “But I’m going to campaign all over this country. I’m going to go to South Philadelphia, I’m going to go to the Black Belt in Alabama, I’m going to go all over America, and I’m going to communicate, I’m going to talk with, I’m going to share the frustrations, the hopes and the dreams that the African-American community has.”
The Philadelphia Daily News busted McCain for this gaffe, making a strong point in an editorial, that McCain is flying under the radar. They go on to make a point I’ve been noticing about Senator McCain throughout this election season, he’s far too confused to hold the toughest job in the land. His confusions over race, the economy and just who we’re fighting in Iraq are just not what America needs to constantly keep perpetuating.
That’s the thing about Senator Obama of Kansan and Kenyan blood, he’s a non-racial candidate. I honestly believe him when he says he has no vested racial interests. You may see him as a black man or simply as an American. There is little doubt, however, that in the White House he would devote himself to all Americans, not just the privileged few embraced by the current administration.
Obama’s “small town” PA remarks – UPDATED
Mayhill Fowler reported today that Obama said this at a campaign event:
OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people feel most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre…I think they’re misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to ‘white working-class don’t wanna work — don’t wanna vote for the black guy.’ That’s…there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today – kind of implies that it’s sort of a race thing.
Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn’t buy it. And when it’s delivered by — it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).
But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What’s the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is — so, we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide health care for every American. So we’ll go down a series of talking points.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.
I had to put the entire transcript, because I know the media is going to clip the crap out of this. The misspeak Senator Obama made was putting two things people just don’t open their opinions about very often: guns and religion. The problem I have with the media barrage that will likely ensue is that he’s not all that far off. Anyone who grew up in a small town in the Midwest and then moved to a city could surely tell you, views like that will never change while you’re constantly looking at the same scenery. It’s not that moving out of the Midwest somehow opens eyes but the prosperity and wealth and opportunity that becomes highly visible when moving to an urban area is impossible to deny.
Furthermore the comment he was making was ultimately referencing those who constantly question whether there are more closet racists in America than people believe, who might vote along race, class or gender lines alone. It was a stupid statement, but far less stupid and far more accurate than “Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran”. I just hope the media is fair with this, which probably won’t happen. Ben Smith at Politico.com, for example, has cut the quote down to a media-sized piece to act as if Barack Obama were trying to explain away these things because of bitterness toward the government. What I’m sure will go uncovered is the underlying truth: the less you have, the more tightly cling to what you do.
Here is Senator Obama’s response to Senator McCain and Senator Clinton’s criticism of his calling people in Pennsylvania bitter:
- Read about the candidates’ finances here.
- Read about millionaires calling Barack Obama an elitist here.
- This use of our money doesn’t make you bitter?
- CNN tells the truth about “bitter” remarks.
- Barack Obama reminds McCain and Clinton that there’s a real world. Now who’s in fantasy-land?
- There’s at least one candidate now clinging tighter to her gun in a time of trial.
- I guess there are actually a lot of bitter people out there.
- Juan Williams, surprisingly enough, is the voice of reason in this debate.
- After Juan Williams’ appearance, no one on Fox can report this objectively.
Bill O’Reilly’s pure paranoia and character revelation
The rundown on News Hounds discusses how Bill O’Reilly spins the New York Times editorial on immigration and Sheriff Joe Arpaio into a media election conspiracy. He revealed who he wants to stay in power, and the storyline he wants to set for America.
The New York Times and the far left want to break down the white Christian male power structure.”
-Bill O’Reilly, Talking Points 04/09/08
The New York Times is a news organization. The reason you read so many negative stories about the current administration in there is because the current administration has failed us miserably. To argue they have utter bias and are ‘far left’ is ignorant in a time where the most extreme of right-wingers hold the White House. People wouldn’t have to push back so much if the government truly served the people and upheld the Constitution and not the pocketbooks of cronies.
There’s no doubt that whatever power structure is in control now should be broken down. This nation is a democracy not an oligarchy, Mr. O’Reilly. We’re not all white, we’re not all Christian, yo momma’s not male so stop trying to retain power in one group which itself is contrary to the Constitution and the beliefs upon which this nation was founded. It was founded by Christian men for religious freedom, not for a Christian nation. They believed in freedom of speech and of the press because they knew it would help balance the government, no matter who is at the helm. The founding fathers knew information would help a democracy progress, and that restricting information would be detrimental to our democracy. They’re not the ‘far-left’ Mr. O’Reilly, they’re the good citizens and patriots of America.
Petraeus could get us out of Iraq on President’s order
Today on Race for the White House with David Gregory, I watched a clip of General Petraeus responding to a question about whether or not he could get us out of Iraq if that were the order of a new Commander-in-Chief, and his tone was not of doomsday. He said if that were the order, it could be accomplished. This is my recollection of the conversation, looking for a video or transcript. When I find the source, I’ll update this page.
My bet is that it could be accomplished far easier than building a democratic utopia in the Middle East. General Petraeus truly strikes me as someone who really knows his stuff and does his duty in every situation. He is currently doing his duty, but I’d love to hear what he says if a Democrat is elected and asks for his true opinion. He’s also the kind of guy whose book on the Iraq War might be a true testament to history.
John in California wrote in to the same Race for the White House show with a great example, many workers in the United States are forced to retire at 65, yet John McCain may be given the most powerful job in the world at age 72. While I agree with one of the moderators, especially on the example of Churchill, that there were great leaders his age. Ronald Reagan is another example, although wanting to be like someone and hitting the mark are two different things.
I simply must pass on McCain. His age makes him more desperate for the Presidency, but no more sharp or effective in that position. The ball-busting on behalf of cutting pork-barrel spending is welcome in the Senate, however it does not qualify him to be a good executive and make the best decisions the first time. Remember his utter confusion about his own stance on condoms. He’s admitted he knew nothing about it and then pulled a John Kerry on the economy. Then he takes money from George Soros for his own reform efforts and proceeds to criticize him. You could argue he’s less sharp with less serious issues, but that really is not a safe enough argument for the most powerful job in the world.
On the contrary, we’ve witnessed many great young or untested leaders in American history. Abraham Lincoln had no previous executive and just two years in the House of Representatives or John F. Kennedy who also had no executive experience, although he had over a decade of legislative experience. If there were a direct correlation between being a good president and experience in any specific way then we would not have these three as our finalists in this Presidential Job Interview Extravaganza. Personally, I’d rather have the young, sharp community organizer and icon for the people in an office created by a document that begins ‘We the People’. That’s just me.
Memo Signed By Bush, AUTHORIZING TORTURE, Surfaces
This memo undercuts the frame that the recent ABC torture story suggested, by simply not mentioning the central role of the president in the NSC, that George W. Bush was elsewhere when decisions were made about torture. Now, we have signed memo indicating Bush was probably at the helm.
It will be interesting to see how this shapes up as it is investigated further, but the idea that this could be true gives me shudders. Not because I am a George Bush hater, I actually have voted for him. I have always been a critic of his cronies, and his defense of them (see Alberto Gonzales, Michael Chertoff, Mike Brown just to name a few). Much of my criticisms have come because I care more about this country and the documents it was founded upon than I do any one head of state. This isn’t a country where we should get blinded by an administration. That’s why the interview for this job is extremely public and extremely long. We aren’t electing a saint, we’re electing someone to lead our country.
This story saddens me because of the state of our Constitution, our basic civil liberties, habeas corpus. A corrupt few have essentially been responsible for an irresponsible and unjust war, the loss of 4,000 American servicemen and countless American and Iraqi citizens and the resulting orphans, a de-regulation ravaged economy and millions of Americans soon-to-be homeless, and billions of dollars in no-bid contracts making those few and their friends filthy rich. President Bush is not a Republican, he’s not a compassionate conservative, he’s nothing at all like the man people voted for in 2000. The neo-conservatives are not representative of the beliefs and values of everyday Americans who identify themselves as Republican. This party stands for small government and fiscal responsibility, not the Department of This-and-That and a $500 billion war on loan from China.
Tell me Mr. Bush, how can a man give you information as his brain and nervous system are permanently damaged from simulated drowning? This isn’t even torture, it’s sadism. I’m all for getting information to prevent further terrorist attacks but by using methods that actually yield results. The origins of waterboarding during the Spanish Inquisition and its use in Cambodian prison camps not far from the Hanoi Hilton where John McCain’s resolve on war was strengthened should tell us this is not tactical, it’s torture.
I truly thought there was more good in President Bush than there apparently is, if this memo is accurate. Given the recent coverage of discussions in the White House involving Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft, and the fact that Ashcroft himself knew “history will not judge this kindly”, it’s really hard to believe there’s not more we don’t know that would horrify most of America. Keep in mind, for these interrogations to be at all effective, they must take place before any trial. In the ticking-time-bomb scenario you can’t wait to establish guilt. So all of these torture methods would be ineffective in getting actionable intelligence if they occurred after we know for a fact the person is guilty and knows something. We are in a war without an opposing uniform and the difference between being a criminal deserving of habeas corpus and rights of the accused and an enemy combatant deserving of no respect for law or the Geneva Conventions is essentially a label.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations:
An “enemy combatant” is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict.
“Enemy combatant” is a general category that subsumes two sub-categories: lawful and unlawful combatants.
Lawful combatants receive prisoner of war (POW) status and the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. Unlawful combatants do not receive POW status and do not receive the full protections of the Third Geneva Convention.
I want our government to be strong on terrorism, but when we’re in Iraq making orphans I’m not feeling any safer. When we knew there was no link to al Qaeda and Iraq, that should have told us that this isn’t a War on Terror. As Republican presumptive nominee Senator John McCain and President Bush both beat the war drum toward Iran, we must remember that al Qaeda is also too extreme for their society in Iran. They are not training terrorists, they just want to be left alone and know that our presence in Iraq could threaten them if we did, for example, convince our population that Iran is now the enemy. We must always remember that our true enemy is in the mountains in Northwest Pakistan and spreading back in Afghanistan. We can’t forget that the reason we don’t have proper focus on Afghanistan and possibly why we don’t have Osama bin Laden in custody today is because we’ve diverted our attention to Iraq.
I have been raised as a student of history, not Democrat or Republican. I was supposed to see what everyone did right and wrong remembering all were human beings, none were gods. That’s how I approach the election. There are three people who have the potential to set the direction our country heads. Much like President Bush, who really only represents a small portion of the Republican party, we are electing a very powerful person.
We are electing the person who may give more of our own rights back, who may give back some of the executive power usurped by the Bush Administration and the person who may bring our loved-ones home without any fear of attack. For the world, it’s the person they find more representative of who we are as a nation, of what we think about possibilities and powers of the people. For the world, we can export democracy in the same way anyone truly exports religion, by example only. The people of Iraq, and they are just people like us, will see our election and wonder what that means for their future.
This truly will be a historic election. Think of the storyline if the wealthy old white man is elected to continue the charge on a war perpetrated upon lies and destroy our economy to pay for it. We’ll tell history: we haven’t learned anything.
Now the AP and MSNBC are reporting the same story, I love how stories break to Digg and a few days later they end up in mainstream media as “Breaking News”. It still lends more credence to the stories of just how vicious our heads of state and their advisers have been during this War on Terror, which would have had nothing to do with Iraq had there not been false claims of weapons of mass destruction and a stubborn commander-in-chief. We are living in sad times, in the words of John Ashcroft “history will not judge this kindly.”
I had to update this page with an example of what waterboarding means. Everyone should get a fair idea for what we are actually talking about, simulated drowning dating back to the Spanish Inquisition, and be able to voice your opinon.
