Canvassing in Iowa

Sunshine on my navy colored Obama shirt creates just the right temperature.  November or not, forgotten gloves are no big deal.  My newspaper journalist buddy Chris and I set out with maps in hand, for a South End neighborhood of an Iowa city.

Our targets are walled to the east by a huge grain processing plant.  A tidy grade school rims our west and we’re further defined by railroad tracks.  I’m feeling lucky to be handing out invitations to Barack’s Town Meeting this week.

The first homeowner to open a door is a thirty-ish woman who squeals, “I love Obama!”  Maybe this assignment won’t be so hard.  Next, a well-seasoned grim woman holds open her door to hear my appeal.  Clad in a worn dress and favorite house slippers, she thanks me and politely informs me her voting decisions are private.

Big black dogs guarding chain linked yards seem to appreciate my passing sweet talk.  I advise them not to snap at Obama people – we’re the good guys (and the dogs agree).  When I ask one attention-seeking mutt if Republicans ever pat his head, I’m answered “I don’t know” in goofy tail wags.

I’m puzzled by old pick-up trucks laden to near collapse, holding freshly cut stumps in front of a few homes.  A chipping sound signals men in backyards, bent at the waist, hand splitting logs into kindling.  I expect to find wood-burning stoves in remote rural areas, but in a city of over 20,000?  I settle on being humbled by their literal hands-on way of controlling energy bills.  Emboldened, I talk with other men leaning over cars, using the buddy-system to get them running again.  I learn the 1/2 house numbers are backyard garages converted into rental property.

Just when my confidence peaks, I meet the woman I carry in my heart.  Tillie is maybe thirty-eight.  She sounds sixty.  As a nurse aide going to school to become a nurse, she works part-time nights in a nursing home.  Her double amputee spouse lies on the couch in the unlit room behind her.

Tillie supports our War on Terror.  Her son was a Marine in Iraq during the first four years of the war, but he’s home now.  She much prefers we fight the terrorists over there than here.  Convinced it’s a real mean world, she feels we need constant protection at all costs.  Her biggest resentment is our country’s tolerance for illegal immigrants’ free use of our medical system.

When Tillie’s husband became ill, he lost his job and both their healthcare benefits.  Then he lost his legs and their retirement vaporized.  The doctor prescribed $2000 a month in medicine.  She says at the point he goes to a nursing home, they’ll have to sell their house so Medicaid will cover his care.  Her friends advise her to divorce him in order to keep their home.  She says this isn’t the right way and vows never to leave him when he needs her the most.  I see on her face she’s had practice at “sucking it up” to keep a sense of control over their destiny.

I ask her if perhaps a lengthy war over there is draining our means of providing Universal Healthcare for citizens over here.  We rail over gazillionaire politicians’ push for Health Savings Accounts as the “economy boosting” means to fix our medical system.  I tell Tillie hers is the story that needs to be told again and again until our leaders finally get it.  She seems to soften at the idea of an invitation to come meet Barack, for the chance to tell her story and to receive his message of help for her blue-collar neighbors.  Then she remembers it’s also the day her husband goes back for another surgery.

When I ask if a voter has logged on to barackobama.com, I’m met with the same flat response:  “We don’t own a computer.”  The few self-proclaimed Hillary supporters I meet each paradoxically listen to this Illinoisan’s reasoning for not supporting her.  I leave them thinking that perhaps my personal demand for ethics in government has helped to buy back a bit of the media induced/image-making consulting they’ve been sold in the past.

Upon sinking into the donated couch at the Field Office, I fall into silent grief.  Mature volunteers man the phones around me, seeking commitment to attend Barack’s Town Meeting in just a few days.  Young and talented field staff quickly train other volunteers about to embark upon their assigned neighborhoods.  I feel but a pinch of the humongous need expressed to Barack daily.  I’m convinced spreading our hope-filled personal reasons for voting for Barack will ignite the victory we need.  All the Tillies drive me on to doing more.  Nothing changes until we coalesce ethics with action.  Can you help?

God, Gays, the Gospel, African Americans and Common Sense

The natives are restless. There’s been an online battle waged among Obama supporters over whether or not African American pastor/gospel singer Donnie McClurkin should be allowed to perform in South Carolina concerts supporting the Obama campaign. The reverend is a “former gay” who believes God can — and should — cure homosexuals of their ills. It’s a silly point of view based on the premise that sexual orientation is a “choice.” Barack Obama has stated, clearly and for years, that this is not a point of view he shares. Nor does he condone it.

The online Obama community spent days in-fighting over the McClurkin inclusion. There were “Christian” Obama supporters, quoting anti-gay scripture, fighting GLBT Obama supporters arguing for human rights and African American Obama supporters telling everybody where the black community stood on the issues–if anybody cared to listen. There was a lot of hyperbole about the “divisions” in the black community in South Carolina.

I write this from South Carolina. My home. I am not black. I’m as white as the underbelly of a right sickly frog. But I’ve lived and worked with the African American community here for years. I’ve been their voice on the op-ed page down here for longer than I’d like to admit. Last week I spent Thursday evening in a black church, among black Obama supporters. I spent Saturday in black beauty salons and barber shops. Sunday I was invited to a regional NAACP meeting. It was not my first.

There is division in the African American community in this state. It’s not about homosexuality. It’s not about religion. There is the feeling, among black voters over 55, that white America cannot be trusted to actually vote for an African American candidate. They also share a common dread that, if elected, Obama will be assassinated. Women are particularly concerned about his safety. Their fears are based on a collective memory of what life was like down here as they grew up. Zero tolerance. And, in their experience, America has not been kind to her visionaries.

Younger voters do not share such deep concerns; they can imagine an America led by a black president. Assassination, to them, is not a familiar or shared experience. They acknowledge “it could happen”, but that fear does not impact their support. Older African American voters are saying things like “I can’tvote for him. We’ve got to protect him. If he’s elected, they’ll just kill him.” One 67 year old told me “He’s a fine man, but if he’s elected there’ll be riots and looting and shooting in the streets!” These fears are real, and we’re doing our best to counter them.

Speak at length with most black voters who support Hillary Clinton here and you’ll find they cannot talk about her without linking her election to “getting Bill back in the White House.” They still miss him. And she’s a “safe bet” — whites will vote for her, Obama will be “spared.”

There is no battling on the street here about Donnie McClurkin. The buzz about the upcoming gospel singings ia all good. No one cares about McClurkin’s personal opinion on homosexuality. They like his music.

As for the rest of us, the squabblers: Personally I cannot and will not reconcile homophobia with Christianity. I find the hard-right fundamentalist “judge-and-condemn” approach to all things moral a very narrow, hateful view of God’s intent, of Christ’s message. No one chooses to be gay, to live in a toxic, threatening environment if you dare to love — or to live a life barren of love altogether to suit the moralizing, the aggressive posturing, of a Prosperity Gospel church which has forgotten “Judge not…” and “Love one another…” right along with “…the least of these…” My take? We are seeing the new generation of vicious bigotry. We replace niggers with queers.   A new group to victimize from our perch of superiority. It stinks.

But all that is my personal belief. I am free to shout if from the town square if I like. What I am not free to do is impose my belief system on every other person who supports my candidate. Or to demand that my candidate sanitize his campaign by throwing anyone with a dissenting or unpopular personal belief off the bus. Or under it.

This campaign is about diversity and inclusion. So we accept one another even when we disagree. It’s about building bridges, not blowing up the one that looks different. Most of us, if we talk long enough, will find we do not agree on every issue. It is not necessary that we do. We share a broader vision, a tolerant one.

It’s certainly not the province of any sub-group of Obama supporters to dictate the terms of inclusion or exclusion for any other member or group. Our time — and our energy — can be put to far better use.

canvassing in cd6

Canvassing in CD6:

Corte Madera, CA. October 13. It is 2pm on a sun-drenched Saturday afternoon and CD 6 coordinator Lance Iuoye is sitting at a picnic table in the town park, checking over canvassing forms with the last returning teams of Barack Obama volunteers. “Turn the Page on Iraq,” a national canvassing day, is drawing to a close.

But this local Obama team was obviously thinking big when they chose this locale to host their event. Since 10 am, their launch pad, highly visible under a festive white canopy and a colorful cache of Blue & White Obama signs, has been set up mid-center on the grass alongside the town’s main parking lot; and thus it has attracted heavy foot traffic and garnered huge interest throughout the day: ongoing soccer games on the adjacent fields, at all-day Open House at the Firehouse next door, and just down the block a community fair chocked full of hundreds of attendees.

Amidst the music and balloons, the Saturday bikers and the family dogs, this pint-sized Obama camp seems a perfectly synchronized slice of a vroomed-up, vitalized community.

Lance is really excited about talking to the team who inspired a teenager he had just registered to drive down and sign up.

“That’s just amazing,” he says. “What did you say to get him to do it?”

“He said Barack Obama was his man but that he was only 17,” says volunteer Sandy Grant “But then his mom walked into the room and said “No, your 18, You can register right now.’ She must have taken him down here. “

Indeed she did, says Lance (big smile). “She said some very nice ladies told him where to go to register right now and after they left he said ‘lets do it.”

Sandy, a busy Mill Valley physician who doesn’t have much spare time for hobbies, is so determined to elect Barack Obama she’s become active in politics for the first time.

“I can’t believe I’m so excited about one kid when there are millions of people all over the country …” her voice trails off. “Next week I’m going to start canvassing in my neighborhood.”

CD6 is reportedly one of the best organized districts in the California campaign, with 56 registered volunteers and a schedule that includes regularly weekly tabling, phone calling, outreach to high schools and colleges and a growing voter registration drive. Volunteers are encouraged to ‘think out of the box’ and meld their personal skills and talents with the campaign’s mission.

The efficiency of today’s volunteer team coordinators rivals the proficiency of any professionally designed event. Before setting out in seven teams, with assignments in three towns, participants are guided through a short tutorial on the do’s and don’t of canvassing (don’t knock on a door more than once, don’t force campaign literature on someone who’s clearly not interested, leave flyers tucked under outdoor mats so they’re not too visible from the street, and be prepared to tell your own story about why you support Obama). Folders are distributed with maps and print outs of the 50 families on each teams’ itinerary, along with clear instructions on how to fill in data on each location. A ‘cheat sheet,’ explaining the goal of the day’s event is provided as an example of how to introduce yourself. Each team receives handfuls of official campaign “Turn the Page in Iraq” handouts and small yellow flyers offering tips to new recruits on how they can become involved in the Obama campaign NOW.

“There are more canvassing events happening here in California today than in any other state,” says Canvassing Coordinator Ben Ludke, a student at College of Marin. “We’re the first campaign to be canvassing in California. This is just the beginning.”

Conversation around the table shifts as Lance asks volunteers for feedback. What can we improve upon next time?

“I didn’t feel that I was informed enough about all the issues,” says Sandy. “I was really nervous someone would ask me something that I couldn’t answer. We need talking points next time.”

“Right now you are your own talking points,” says Lance,“ acknowledging that talking point memos are in the works and should be available by the next canvas.

For every issue mentioned in this discussion, however, (“I’m not sure on his stand on education …. on immigration … on Blackwater … on tax breaks … “) someone in the group has a well researched answer and can offer resources: listen to his speeches, read the blogs, visit the website, join the listservs.

By all accounts, Marin County’s first official Obama canvassing event succeeded in much more than registering another Democrat to vote in the Feb. 5 Primary. Over 500 homes were contacted, resulting in conversations with over 140 local democrats about Obama’s position on ending the war in Iraq and whether or not they had made a decision on which candidate they were leaning towards.

Currently, based on this narrow sampling, it appears that most people in the section of County are still undecided; with 21% strongly supporting Barack Obama, 38% undecided, and less than 10% committed to another candidate.

Undoubtedly, the most encouraging outcome was the unanimous consent among participants that people are just aching to talk about what’s happened to America and discuss how Obama can set things straight.

“It was strange,” says one volunteer. “You’d knock on someone’s door, feeling really apologetic about interrupting them, but when they saw who you were they were just so happy to have a chance to talk about things. It was like they’ve felt so isolated for so long and now all of the sudden here was somebody on their porch inviting them to talk about it.

From another: “I didn’t meet anyone who wasn’t willing to listen to me, who didn’t want to know why I was backing Barack. Everybody seems really ready for change, really ready to believe in someone again.”

One volunteer recounts a story of a conversation she had with a woman who opened her front door with a huge bottle of Tropicana orange juice in her hand and a tense ‘why are you bothering me now?’ look on her face.

“Right away, you knew how busy she was. You could see right through the house to the backyard where three or four little girls were sitting down for lunch under this big striped umbrella. It was really bad timing. But when she saw my Obama hat and heard why we were there, she forgot everything else. She said she wasn’t ‘plugged in yet” but she wanted us to tell her why we were supporting Obama. She asked questions. We must have talked to her for ten minutes. If she was leaning towards Hillary when we arrived, I don’t think she was when we left. You could just feel how hungry she was to talk about things: Iraq and Iran, Healthcare, education, the war. The need for big change in America. Wow, that was an amazing experience.”

In this small corner of Marin, at least, the battle is strictly between Obama and his main rival, New York Senator Hillary Clinton. But, say volunteers, people who were leaning toward Hillary said they are just now starting to do their research. Hillary is what they know; Obama is who they what to discover.

“People still think it’s really early in the campaign,” says Ludke. “A lot of Californians don’t realize yet that the Democrat’s Primary is Feb. 5. That’s why now is the ideal time for us to start canvassing. Hillary hasn’t started yet. We’re the only campaign actively canvassing in California right now.”

A conversation ensues between Ludke and a couple of volunteers about the ‘grassroots’ organization of the campaign, with Ludke drawing a flow chart outlining the chain of command.

“But that’s not grassroots,” someone says. “That’s a traditional hierarchical business model. We want people organizing right where they live, working out of their cars. People should have access to Obama materials so they can just hand things out.

“But they can,” says Ludke. “They can just download things off the internet. They can purchase supplies online at the Obama store. You’ve got to understand that California right now has only one paid employee. We can’t afford to supply everyone with free materials.”

Jasper Goldberg, a student at nearby Branson high school and a member of Students for Barack Obama saunters over to the table.

“I have boxes of Obama stickers I can give you,” he says, approaching a group of women who are discussing investing in a stockpile of gear for CD6 volunteers. “How many do you want now?”

He plops a plastic bag of stickers on the table. Wallets emerge. None of these Obama supporters want something for nothing. They all want the same thing: something promoting Obama to give away for nothing. Goldberg shrugs, accepts proffered donations. Says he’ll use the money to purchase more Obama gear.

It’s after three and everybody’s tired, has places to go, but seems reticent to leave. Opinions start flying on Obama’s best speech.

Riverside Church. The Foreign Policy address at Des Moines. Selma. New York (Washington Square Park). Springfield.  San Francisco, last month when he introduced what instataneously became the infectious rallying cry of the campaign, “Fired up, Ready to Go.”

But as is always the case in these talks, someone always brings up where it all began, for most of us. And this time it’s Ludke who reminds us.

“For me it’s still the 2004 convention. I watched that speech and said ‘That man’s my president.”

a shift, perhaps?

Is it just me? An illusion? Or are some of you also sensing an ever so slight shift in the political current; dare I suggest detecting a miniscule tear in the tightly constructed, intricately oiled veneer of the sheer perfection of the Hillary Clinton roll out?

Have you noticed anything? Tidbits here, there, trickling into media where just a few weeks back there was naught.

Am I the only observor who detected a hint of distaste over Clinton key-strategist Mark Penn’s association with Blackwater? A slightly rised eyebrow over the influx of cash from Billy’s buddies at his nonprofit Global Initiative? An illusion to impropriety over that nefarious Hsu’s $850,000 bundle? What about the near comic reappearance of the rabidly robotic Hill&Co. attack dogs, frothing and straining at the bit when questions surfaced over Clinton’s judgement in supporting the Kyle Lieberman amendment.

Then all that flack about ‘the pin!’ At last, they had him! Obama, squirming against the wall. Yet what ensured was an open discussion of the post-911-world partisan-ization of patriotism, with informed sources noting the frequency with which Mrs. Clinton substitutes haute couture accessories for the red, white and blue emblem on her suit ensembles. Color coordination, you know.

I mean, like overnight, the doubting Thomases among Obama supporters were barely recovering their footing when MSM pundits began questioning the veracity of the latest WaPo/AP poll which trumpeted a massive Clinton lead. Suddenly, pundits were asking the right questions. “What about what’s happening on the ground? How DO you account for this incredibe groundswell of support for Obama?”

Well, I have a suggestion. I think perhaps we are witnessing the re-emergence of dormant patterns of communication, a type of low frequency vibration which is slipping under the radar of corporate media watchdogs and their enmeshed special interest groups. Somehow, despite MSMs prediliction to play down information on when and where Senator Obama plans to speak, to distort or ignore his message, news of the Obama phenomena is spreading like a rumor of the next iPod release.

Perhaps the first inklings of a potential sea change emerged back in California last month when, just days before the Petraus hearings. Kos predicted the Senator from Illinois had missed his opportunity to launch a pre-emptive strike on the truthfulness of the General’s upcoming testimony. He called yet another set for our former first lady. Well, the outcry was near immediate. We knew beter. No way supporters was going to let this opp slide by. (The Obama team was planning something extraordinary on Petraeus, and a knock out punch came that Tusday in the form of a foriegn policy speech outlining a daring and innovative evolutionary approach to America’s role in theaters of conflict abroad. Chaulk a big one up for our side.)

This was also the weekend which will forever be remembered for the launch of the infectious “Fired up, Ready to Go” mantra, a rallying cry already as potent as “You gotta believe” in the New York Mets miraculous ascent to the World Series in the ’69 season.

But then there was Obama in New York City. Ten days of preparation. Phone banks coast to coast. 24,000 in Washington Square Park. Now as I’ve said before, 24,000 people gathering in any spot at one time in NYC is in itself news. But MSM, in its sheer audacity, strategically downplayed the event. I think that decision backfired.

It appears to me as if little by little since that evening, the stuffing seems to be leaking from the mannequin. Mind you, right now only recalcitrant threads are visible but nonetheless, the pattern is not rock steady.

Since New York, it appears as if the surefire policies of message control are becoming less effective. Barely perceptible glitches are surfacing in standard playbook protocol. It’s kinda like watching a run of Bill Walsh-Joe Montana 2 minute drills falling just short of the goal line because a new, unexpected variable has everybody a tad off center. Expertly executing ‘X’ no longer necessarily means that ‘Y’ will follow. Now Joe and Bill aren’t even mindful enough to recognize anything’s gone asunder, so they’re continuing with the same drill; maybe they sense they’ve lost flow but damned if it matters anyway. It’s no contest.

What I’m suggesting is that more and more of us are no longer sitting speechless in the stands observing The Champions making mincemeat of the underdogs. We’re starting to question the calls, to doubt the tally on the scoreboard. America is beginning to pause and say “Now wait a minute. Something’s just not kosher here.” In essence, we are no longer counting on the refs or instant replay. We’re starting to throw down our own flags.

In and of itself, this variable, this deviation, is so inconseqential that it is not perceivable as a factor. But the factor, nonetheless, is there. And it is multiplying.

To take the football analogy a tad farther, let’s revisit the Kyle Lieberman amendment. Hillary emerges from the huddle and makes the call “We’re voting yes on this one.” But in the bleachers, people are asking “What’d she do that for? Why’d she call for that play again? Makes no sense, unless she’s not aiming for the same goal we are.”

Do they really want to trust this lady with the football?

Now it’s not like the Hillary campaign is actually aware of this, but I think a growing number of us are aware of the vast disparity between what our eyes and ears and intuition are telling us and what’s being force fed to us. No, the Hillary Team right now is just too busy snipping stray threads off the mannequin to even consider the pattern might just be fatally flawed.

There is a limit to how long you can contain the facts on the ground, but ignoring 12,000 in Oakland, 15,000 in Phoenix and 20,000 in Austin, doesn’t quite match up to deeming as a “nonevent” 24,000 New Yorkers jammed into an historic small Greenwich Village park to see and listen to a candidate for the 2008 Democratic Presidential Nomination.

No, that particular crowd created an energy so intense it surpassed the need for media coverage. It ‘outed’ them, revealed their true colors.

In this new inter-connected world of jet travel and blogs and text messaging and youtube videos, something like this happening in New York is viral; it’s all over facebook and flick’r and youtube and myspace and twitter and technorati. Somebody tells somebody else on a bus or a subway or a commuter flight and then they’re telling their friend who is telling their friend whose friend saw Obama at a rally in New Hampshire and has been talking about nothing else since. Has her whole family and neighorhood excited. She’s converted her teenagers and Uncle Charlie and the guy from Triple A who jump starts her Dodge Dart every two months

The Obama Campaign and the Rainforest: Communication Theory

Experts in the field of animal communications assert that animals are adept at using their physical environment to ensure the maximum audibility of their signals. The Bornean tree frog, for example, communicates within its species by slithering into a tree hole and adjusting the frequency of its call until it hits the one note that makes the hole and the tree resonate. It plays the tree, like a musical instrument.

It appears that tropical rainforests are like symphonies, where each particular species communicates on its own unique frequency, aware of timing, spacing and tone to insure communication.

The survival of the New Guinean Cassowary, a colorful, large, and flightless bird, is directly related to its remoteness. Recently, a scientist decided that the only way to find cassowaries was to listen for them. But capturing the cassowary call wasn’t all that easy. Not only do they call infrequently, but they speak within a spectrum that is below the range of human hearing. Frequently, humans feel a cassowary’s call rather than hearing it. In fact, the cassowary’s call has been compared to a mini earthquake.

This strategy for communicating works for the cassowary because the low-frequency of its vibrations enable it to remain incognito to prey accustomed to operating in the worlds of sounds and images. Not only that, but low-frequency communications travel farther, so cassowaries regularly chat long distance.

In another study relating to animal communications, a Stanford scientist discovered that elephants use foot stomping to communicate with each other over distances as far away as 20 miles. In 2002, Caitlin O’Connell-Rodwell, a Stanford biologist, traveled to Namibia, Africa, to investigate her theory that elephants communicate via an outflow of low-frequency seismic vibrations. They signal to one another when they are in danger, seeking a mate, or passing on information about food and water.

Apparently, the human brain has adapted over time, converting most of the space once used for sensing vibration for use by the more immediately powerful senses of sight and sound. Yet O’Connell-Rodwell notes that “traditional instruments such as the didgeridoo of Australia, talking drums of West Africa, and the stomping dances of Native Americans all produce signals that have the potential to be carried through the ground over long distances.

“These instruments could have been important communication mechanisms similar to smoke signals, but at much greater distances than smoke signals could be detected,” she says.

Just recently, reporter Bryan Miller journeyed on a triple-deckered tugboat down the Congo from Kinshasa. Some 700 kilometers and seven days later, he arrived at Mbandaka to transfer to a large barge en route to Ndobo. Describing the barge as a floating refuge camp, he recounts how hundreds of villagers had already crowded aboard and set up camps, anticipating the tugboat’s arrival.

“How did they know we were coming,” he asked the captain.

“The neighboring village told them,” the captain replied. “With drums.”

***

So, how do you explain the momentum of the Obama campaign? True, virtual communication networks are a big part of it, but I can’t tell you how many Obama supporters I’ve met who don’t read blogs, have only logged in once to barackobama.com and have no idea how to navigate the site, let alone join a discussion group or listserv.

And, of course, the message also isn’t getting out by drumbeat or smoke signals or foot stomping. But there is no doubt that a sizeable chunk of Americans sense something’s happening. They feel it in their blood, sense it on their skin, understand it in their soul. They are finding nourishment. They are communicating.

There’s synchrnoicity at work in the appearances of huge numbers of people at Obama events across the country. An energy is being unleashed which seems to know no boundaries and resonate between and beyond people. It is an energy that is allowing us to reconnect with one another, to celebrate, to hope. To commit to do extraordinary things.

You don’t find this type of communication in newspapers and cable news and magazines.

But if you’re an Obama supporter, you recognize it innately, because it’s pure. It’s a core element, non-negotiated. Right now, at this point we are communicating with a man who is going somewhere and asking us to come along.

No doubt about it. The message is out there. It’s being picked up, interpreted and implemented by hundreds of thousands of Americans.

It has the markings of a veritable symphony. Find your niche. Sing your song. It’s not going to be easy. But you gotta put on your marching shoes and get to work. As Simon and Garfunkle once said, “We’re all playing in the same band.”

We’re all tuning in to that Middle “C.”

Pundits, Pollsters and Politics: Missing the Mark?

Prevailing wisdom: This is a campaign and a candidate doomed to failure. HRC is inevitable. It’s all over. Done. Nice try, but pack up your bags and go home.

Maybe you just had to be there. Rock Hill, South Carolina, Saturday October 6th. Over two thousand people hopped aboard the O Train. It was quite a ride. Barack Obama not only came to town, he went to town and an overflow crowd was happy to join him on the trip.

The throng, in the heart of Democrat-deprived Red State Dixie, was diversity personified. Black and white, Hispanic and Asian, young and old. There were folks dressed to kill alongside the rural poor wearing clean but well-worn clothing. There was no division of races in the stands, no great blocs of dark faces and light ones. The affluent sat alongside the working poor. There wasn’t an empty seat in the Northwestern High School gymnasium and the floor was packed. Event organizers had to turn disappointed people away at the door. Standing room only. No one seemed to mind.

I was with the “standees” for about an hour before Senator Obama spoke. Press credentials dangling around my neck, steno pad in hand, I talked to Democrats, Independents and a surprising number of Republicans. Everyone wanted to talk about this man, this campaign and the future of the nation. Words, phrases, like “charisma”, “sound judgment”, “speaks to diversity”, “the need to heal”, “diplomacy over hate- and fear-mongering” were repeated over and again. “Obama spoke out against this war in 2002 when Hillary and Edwards got fooled by Bush into giving him a blank check to go to war!” was a common theme.

Republicans were as disillusioned with Bush’s war as were Democrats and Independents. They’d had enough and they like Senator Obama’s stance on phased redeployment ASAP. “We need a change in the worst way,” one of them lamented, “and there’s something about [Obama]…he makes sense.” I heard, far more than I expected to hear it, deep concern  about the way the rest of the world sees us after 6+ years of this administration. They don’t want a Bush-clone in 2008. Conservatives were angry about the cost of the war. “Half a million dollars a minute–right down the drain!” one man snapped. Bush fatigue was thick as cigar smoke.

The Senator from Illinois spoke for nearly an hour. No podium, no notes. He spoke to the issues–war and diplomacy, health care and education, oil money funding terrorists and the bane of fossil fuels. The crowd was fully engaged, cheering, clapping; choruses of “Amen!” and “Yeah!” and “You’re the man!” punctuated his oratory. He got tough on parents and parenting, demanding that we step up to the plate and be responsible for our children. Every challenge for change was met with roars of enthusiasm.

And he dealt with the Big E: Experience. He’d had a little spat with Hillary, he said, about his willingness to meet with all world leaders–even the bad guys. After all,  Ronald Reagan never stopped talking to the “Evil Empire”.  “Naive Obama!” he declared, “Naive Obama will lose a propaganda war! Well, I’m not worried about a propaganda battle with some petty tyrant!…Strong counties and their presidents talk to their adversaries…we’re not afraid of any other country…Experience does not equal judgment! Age does not equal character!…[I should] wait longer? Why? To be more like the folks in Washington?”

The crowd went wild, their response deafening.

Obama slowed the pace. “[Change] won’t be easy…I’m asking you to make the sacrifice–’cause none of it will come cheap…I’m asking you to make the hard choice…to be responsible…to hold your president and your government accountable…“

The roar of approval, sacrifice or no, was ear-splitting.

“We can change the world!” Barack cried out. The masses responded in kind. The campaign mantra began: “FIRED UP! READY TO GO!!”  The Republicans I’d spoken with earlier were swaying and chanting with the Democrats and Independents for all they were worth.

The crowd enthusiasm for the candidate, for change and for one another did not dissipate when the rally ended. Every race, every income level, every age and gender left unified–chanting, singing, high-fiving, eager for a new day, a new political landscape.

Pundits and pollsters tell us Barack Obama is unlikely to win the nomination. But they’ve been wrong before and, if the stunning reaction of over two thousand South Carolinians is any indication, they may well be wrong again. 

politics … as usual

I received a letter from my liberal Senator Barbara Boxer the other day, asking me to donate more funds to her campaign to insure her victory in the 2010 election. Now while Boxer has more chutzpah than just about anyone on Capital Hill, I turned her down. Conditionally. In essence, I told her that I was ’sick and tired of being sick and tired” of politics as usual in Washington.

And then I spelled out in clear and uncertain terms what she would have to do to receive any more mullah from me: Publicly endorse Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic Presidential candidacy in 08.

The power of the purse strings. We might not have much leverage when it comes to how our representatives fail to allocate our tax dollars. We may not have control over the huge conglomerates and lobbyists stretching campaign finance laws to jettison their candidates into office. But there is a form of ‘bundling’ we can engage in. A million strong refusal to add any of our bucks to election coffers until our representatives announce that they, too, are ready for a sea change in America. A sea change led by the good Senator from Illinois.

Here is a copy of the letter I sent to Senator Boxer. Feel free to copy, amend, elaborate and augment as (and if) you see fit.

Dear Senator Boxer:

Before I contribute any more funds to your campaign, I need something from you! A public endorsement of Senator Barack Obama.

You have done an outstanding job representing California, but you will not have my support (nor the support of tens if not hundreds of thousands of Obama supporters) if you back Senator Clinton for the Democratic presidential election. As Senator Obama has said repeatedly, the time for change in American politics is now. I expect you to join him in this fight.

I especially recall attending Sen. Obama’s immensely successful fundraiser for your last reelection campaign. There’s a lovely video post of the packed event on YouTube; you were very excited and grateful, a most gracious and worthy benefactor of his 2004 Democratic Convention speech popularity.

Given the fact that Senator Clinton is funding her campaign with oil, pharmaceutical, mainstream media, and military contractor industry contributions that break all Congressional records, and are in no small part tied directly to her being the politically active Clinton, I see no reason to believe the Senator has any inclination to effect any positive change in Washington.

Here are my major concerns with the first Clinton administration:

1. Vigorous support of China’s entrance into the WTO despite ongoing human rights violations
2. Support of NAFTA, the WTO and economic policies which have outsourced manufacturing, resulting in economic devastation across America (most recently resulting in massive recalls of goods from CHINA due to insufficient quality control)
3. Contributing to economic devastation in Mexico and other Central American countries through unfair trade practices and relocation of US mega corporations to the region, thereby destabilizing labor organization and employment for rural Latin and US Americans especially, and throwing the US into the race to the bottom instead of into the lead for an equal playing field for workers on both sides of the border
4. Failure to render illegal offshore accounts of major US corporations resulting in the loss of billions of dollars in corporate taxes for America
5. Introducing the Telecommunications Act, which essentially has resulted in government (now synonymous with Corporate) control over virtually all mass media
6. The passage of the Terrorism Act, which resulted in exhaustive constitutional violations, as Americans were secretly surveilled by our government
7. Clandestine dealings with the Taliban on behalf of pipeline plans of mega-oil companies
8. Failure to address the Rwanda genocide because of commercial interests in using Rwanda as an entry point to exploit the natural resources of the Congo
9. Initiating education policies which paved the way for No Child Left Behind, a system which has virtually destroyed our public school system and any hope for advancement for millions of children
10. Backing down on the promise to open the military to openly gay, lesbian and bisexual soldiers and a failure to deal effectively with any gay rights issues.

Senator Boxer, I count on your integrity to ensure that Hillary Clinton is not our party’s choice to resume power in the White House. Your constituents and the people of America rely on fearless leaders such as yourself to speak truth.

Sincerely,

Senator Boxer’s office shot back an email informing me it was against Congressional ethics for her to engage in this type of polical endorsement request. I responded it was against my ethics to continue to support candidates who aren’t directly addressing the lack of ethics rampant within our elected leadership and requested removal from her mailing lists.

cellphones & youtube & mashups, Oh my!

So Senator Obama is telling us this campaign is about us, right? So what do we do? We rally an unprecedented 24,000 in NYC. On ten days notice!

But if you live in New York and you weren’t anywhere in the vicinity of Greenwich Village last Thursday night, chances are you have no idea what went down there.

“Obama appearance No Story.” So reads the subject line in an mail from a friend in New York this morning, who reported no coverage of the event in the dailies or local news stations. (In all fairness, the NYT wrote up the event on “The Caucus” election page, Newsday did a short blurb as did The Post, and local tv had some footage.)

But I’m a former New Yorker; in fact, I am a graduate of NYU, and back in the day any crowd of 24,000 in Washington Square would have led Eyewitness News at 11, won a splash photo on Page 1 of the New York Daily News, and been all over the Today Show the next morning. Just to give you some semblance of reality: 24,000 in a downtown Manhattan neighborhood park is more than 1/3 the total capacity of Shea Stadium. In fact, a crowd that size would just about fill up the San Francisco Giant’s ballpark.

Folks across America are hearing the Senator and they are showing up: The Springfield 15,000, The Iowa 10,000, The Oakland 12,000. The Austin 20,000.

But the media is all about those poll numbers, Senator. I’m beginning to think Obama supporters just never go home, let alone answer the telephone. They’re too busy traveling from rally to rally, state to state, hosting house-parties, walking for change. God knows, they’re always too busy text messaging to answer a land line anyway.

I’d have to say judging from the turnout whenever or wherever across the country Senator Obama shows up, that so far he’s done a pretty good job of waking America up. The way I see it, most of our newspapers, radio shows and tv news stations just aren’t fired up yet. They sure ain’t ready to go.

Most of us will concede that no candidate has won the presidency in recent history without being first anointed by the corporate elite. And we’re well aware that in today’s America the average citizen feels about as powerless as a young child tossing rocks at invading Israeli bulldozers and tanks.

Assuredly, we have our grievances … and as the Senator says, we’re “sick and tired of being sick and tired.”

Right now, we have to cede them the polls. Nobody would listen anyway if we talked about how Angus Reid himself called the biggest secret in polling the “no response” rate.” Or if we questioned the reliability and authenticity of automated polling systems or called into question the conflict of interest that appears to exist relative to most polls and their corporate sponsors.

They just keep predicting all the hoopla will burn out pretty soon, as polls continue to coronate Clinton and turn a blind eye to any and all references to her questionable ethical practices and all that lobbyist money rolling in. Just yesterday, I heard Bill put a stop to an article due to be published in GQ discussing in-fighting in the campaign. Apparently, all he had to say is he just won’t talk with them anymore if they printed it.

Does anybody in the Obama campaign have that kind of clout? No, but we sure do try harder.

Roll up your sleeves and get ready to duke this one out. The real battle between Clinton and Obama is not being waged in the headlines of the nation’s tabloids, on the Fox Noise Machine or even on Keith Olberman. No, the Obama campaign is taking this thing out onto the streets of your neighborhood. You are going to have to open that front door and step outside.

We’re not talking states here, we’re not even talking Congressional Districts anymore. In fact, this campaign is honed down to pre-Precinct level. In ‘08, the race for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency of the United States is happening right in your front yard.

This is David v. Goliath; it’s The Little Engine that Could; it’s a real life rendition of The Heroes, an unfolding story of ordinary people doing extraordinary things.

So put your Obama sign out. If you don’t have one, make one. Let’s create a 21st century version of ‘the peace sign.’ Start tipping your thumb and index finger together and flashing the big “O.”

Inevitability

The first rule in physics may very well be the first rule in politics as well: an object in motion tends to stay in motion.

Today, we are a country on a clear course.  We are a country at war, with thousands dead, and no exit strategy. We are a country addicted to foreign oil, trapped in habits of pollution, reluctant to imagine our own solutions. We are a country divided over the direction of our own culture, quick to condemn our fellow citizens, unaccustomed to seeking out common ground. We are a country of significant gaps in income, achievement, and opportunity. We are a country of damaged reputation, which has squandered international goodwill, and antagonized new enemies. We are a country that disrespects our fellow man, whether they are stranded on their own rooftops surrounded by floodwaters, or shipped in secret to illegal prisons abroad and held without charge or trial. We are a country adrift from its foundational values, detached from its own political process, concerned instead with comfort and leisure above all else. We are a country that has forsaken the health of its own national character. 

Things being what they are, our judgment as a nation is in question. In the absence of a change of direction, we are likely to continue further in this direction. It is time to assess where we find ourselves, how we have gotten here, and where we want to go. What’s more, it is time to assess what political force is strong enough to effectively alter our currently disastrous course. It is time for America to make a decision.

Right now, there are many forces in motion in American politics, each seeking to influence the trajectory of our national direction. And while these forces range from policies to personalities, we find that three forces present Americans with the most considerable implications and consequences. The first of these forces is George W. Bush, whose leadership and influence remains a fact of life. His relevance, for now, is indisputable. The second is Hillary Clinton, whose candidacy has placed her as the clear frontrunner in the race for her party’s nomination and shrouded her campaign in an aura of inevitability. Given her strong standing, it is necessary to imagine and scrutinize what her leadership stands to mean to our national direction. And the third force in motion is the candidacy of Barack Obama, who has yet to pull significantly ahead in the race, even while his message has resonated with hundreds of thousands of Americans who have donated and attended his rallies in ever-increasing and unrivaled numbers over the past eight months.

With each of these forces, there are things we know, and things we can reasonably presume. We know the mistakes and the abuses of George Bush. It is easy to imagine what his political influence still stands to mean for the occupation of Iraq, the ballooning national debt, and any further sidestepping of congressional oversight and the Constitution. In other words, the self-proclaimed Decider remains perfectly positioned to continue in the direction of abysmal leadership to dire ends. Much remains to be done in the next 16 months of his administration. It is in light of this reality that we must more closely assess the other two political forces at play, for what they each stand to inherit and contribute.

We have come to know a great deal about Hillary Clinton. We know that she is smart. We know she is driven. We know she practices a very personal spirituality, which has grounded her in forgiveness. We know her supporters are convinced of her goodness as a person and promise as a politician. We know she has won over a skeptical New York, who has embraced her and reelected her by a significant margin. We know she is running a smart and effective campaign.

We also know she voted to authorize George W. Bush to invade Iraq in 2002. We know she chose not to read the complete National Intelligence Estimate prior to casting her vote. We know Clinton publicly and inaccurately accused Saddam Hussein of giving “aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.” We know that prior to the war, Clinton also voted against the failed Levin amendment to require that George Bush prioritize diplomacy first by seeking a U.N. resolution to wage war in Iraq, and to return to Congress for approval if his efforts failed. We know she argued to stay the course in Iraq in 2003. We know she argued against the withdrawal of troops in 2005. We know she did not begin to position herself differently on this issue until public sentiment swayed in late 2005 with the criticism of Representative John Murtha. We know that just last week, she voted to recognize the Iranian National Guard as a terror organization, laying the groundwork for military action against Iran and further empowering George Bush to extend the war in the Middle East. We know she has consistently shown poor judgment on the most important issue of our time. We know she has failed to take responsibility for that error. We know that she has not learned the lesson of her mistake in 2002.  

All that said, there is one more thing we know about Hillary Clinton: you love her, or you hate her. Nationally, she polls quite negatively. In every Gallup poll since June 1 of this year, at least 46% of those polled indicated they had an unfavorable impression of Hillary Clinton. That number has remained generally the same across Gallup polling from the last decade. We know how she stirs the Republican base to attack and how, whether provoked or not, she antagonizes “vast, right-wing conspiracies” against her and her husband Bill Clinton. We have every reason to imagine that the partisan divide of the 1990s that prompted Whitewater and propelled personalities like Rush Limbaugh would return in full force with a renewed, galvanized sense of purpose. Joe Biden put it well in last week’s MSNBC debate when he said that “a lot of the old stuff” from Bill Clinton’s presidency would come back with a Hillary Clinton presidency. This includes Bill Clinton, himself. Now is the time to ask questions about how Bill Clinton’s international status and influence as a private citizen via his foundation and Global Initiative might blur the line with official American policy should he serve as America’s first gentleman.

All these points leave us to ask several questions, in fact. Does Hillary Clinton have the judgment to be President? Has her record shown that she understands the issues we face as a nation? Can she unite all Americans under a common vision and calling? Can she counter her unfavorable impression on half of the country’s citizens? Does it make sense that Clinton is the inevitable candidate for her party’s nomination? Can she in fact win the presidency in a general election? Will Clinton advance the health of our national character? Will another Clinton be the answer to another Bush? Can she truly offer America a new direction?

To all of these questions, the answer is assuredly: no. 

This leads us to consider the political force of Barack Obama. One thing we know about Obama is that we are still getting to know him. Since he announced his bid for the presidency last February, Gallup has consistently shown that 8 – 16 % of those polled have never heard of Obama. We also know that as people learn about him, they come to a favorable opinion of him. Since last February, Obama has usually polled at or above 50%. It is perhaps not difficult to hold Obama in a favorable light after learning more about him.

We know Obama moved to the south side of Chicago as a recent college graduate and worked as a community organizer in a neighborhood rife with crime and poverty. We know he decided then and there that the problems of Chicago’s south side were systemic and could only be addressed by rewriting the policies that allowed them to exist at all. We know Obama earned a law degree from Harvard and became the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. We know he returned to Chicago to start a civil rights law practice and teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago. We know he was encouraged by others to run for state senate in Illinois, where he served for eight years. We know he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004 on a record of achievement in Illinois.

We know Democrats work with Barack Obama. We know Republicans work with Barack Obama. We know he brought them together in Illinois to create the state Earned Income Tax Credit, which provided $100 million in tax cuts to families over three years. We know he worked with Illinois law enforcement to require the videotaping of confessions after several death row inmates were found to be innocent. We know he worked to expand early childhood education. We know Obama partnered with Democrat Russ Feingold in the Senate to pass an ethics reform bill, aimed at restoring the conduct of both political parties.

We know Obama has already changed the way politics and campaigning is done in America. We know he refuses to accept donations from lobbyists or political actions committees (PACs.) We know he has shattered fundraising efforts at the grassroots level time and again, having most recently earned 501,000 donations from 351,000 contributors over the past three financial quarters. We know he attracted record-breaking crowds across the country: 20,000 in Austin, Texas; 10,000 in Oakland, California; 20,000 in Atlanta, Georgia; 24,000 in New York City. We know he has attracted this support by campaigning on the politics of hope. We know his message awakens Americans.

And perhaps most importantly in this coming election, we know Obama can make hard decisions and make them well. We know Obama opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2002. We know he was courageous enough to state his position publicly and decent enough to stand by his position when it was considered unpopular at best and un-American at worst. We know Obama believes in telling America what it needs to hear when it doesn’t want to hear it.

Right now, the fact is, America needs to hear something difficult. Right now America needs to hear that our reputation abroad is tarnished. Right now the purpose and the relevance of America are both in question among some. The idea of America is in doubt throughout the world as they wonder if America’s moment has passed. They wonder this in the Middle East where we have abandoned the peace process. They wonder this in Darfur where genocide is annihilating life everyday. They wonder this in Kenya where an entire generation of orphans lies in the wake of HIV/AIDS. They even wonder this at home, where the ninth ward of New Orleans remains in ruins and the city of Jena, Louisiana exposes the subtle prejudices that corrupt our legal system more than a generation after the Civil Rights Movement. Where has America gone? Why is America so absent? Where is America’s leadership?

People ask this because America has simply forgotten how to be America. We have forgotten how to be brothers and sisters. We have forgotten to use reason over rhetoric. We have forgotten that rights of man are what bind us together and what legitimizes our way of life – here and around the world.

This is a matter of nothing less than our national character. Who do we believe we are? Who do we chose to be in this world? We must remember and restore our national character in fundamental and bold ways. Thomas Paine said shortly after the birth of America “let but a nation conceive rightly of its character, and it will be chastely just in protecting it. None ever began with a fairer than America, and none can be under a greater obligation to preserve it.” He also said, “A good opinion of ourselves is exceedingly necessary in private life, but absolutely necessary in public life, and of the utmost importance in supporting national character.” America, Paine wrote, has it in her choice to do, and to live, as happily as she pleases. The world, he said, is in her hands.

We need to hear these things. It is vital to our nation’s future. The only candidate speaking to us is Barack Obama. The only candidate being honest with us is Barack Obama. The only candidate offering us a next step is Barack Obama. The only candidate telling us it is time once again to have a leader of the free world is Barack Obama.  He has said, “This election offers us the chance to turn the page and open a new chapter in American leadership. The disappointment that so many around the world feel toward America right now is only a testament to the high expectations they hold for us. We must meet those expectations again, not because being respected is an end in itself, but because the security of America and the wider world demands it. This will require a new spirit – not of bluster and bombast, but of quiet confidence and sober intelligence, a spirit of care and renewed competence. It will also require a new leader. And as a candidate for President of the United States, I am asking you to entrust me with that responsibility.”

Inevitably, America will march forward. Inevitably, America will elect a new leader in 2008. Inevitably, the threats of today will become the conflicts of tomorrow. Inevitably, the errors of the Bush years will become the responsibility of our next President. And inevitably, the direction of our nation will be defined by that same leader. Inevitably, in this election we are making a decision about our national character.

What remains to be determined is what we as Americans will decide to value in that process. Will we support or reject the cycle of Bush and Clinton leadership? Will we seek out new understandings of our own citizenship? Will we engage in the renewal of our country’s purpose and processes? Will we choose to change the course of our nation in ways that are fundamental and bold? Will we acknowledge where we have failed so that we might design a new course that will lead to greater success? Will we admit that the political age we have just lived through is not working and decide to turn the page on that chapter in our history? Will we change the course we are on in America and seek out a new direction? Will we decide that there is a better way? Will we recognize soon enough and clearly enough that such a better way is already galvanizing, already forming, and already becoming its own force in American politics? Will we let that force of hope, reason, and unity transform us and redirect us as a nation? Where will out current course inevitably lead us? And what must we inevitably do to alter it?

 An object in motion, after all, tends to stay in motion. It takes a great force to stop it.

The Hucakbee Hustle: good dance moves, easy to follow

Hollywood couldn’t have scripted it better. Dirty Dancing and Strictly Ballroom pale in comparison.

The American GOP Forum at Morgan State in Baltimore. A chance for Republican presidential wannabes to strut their stuff for a largely African American audience in attendance — and with, maybe, hundreds of thousands more courtesy of PBS, who televised the debate. Tavis Smiley moderating. Who’da thunk it? What self-respecting conservative president-in-waiting would pass up such an opportunity to make his case?

Well, the four top tier Repubs took a pass. McCain, Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, all of ‘em. Seems they thought “the audience might be hostile and unresponsive.”

Big mistake.

The event organizers deserve an Emmy for turning the snub to “Best Dramatic Effect in Reality TV.”  The six “second tier & lower” candidates, Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Alan Keyes took their places at their six slick, see-through podia. You could see every inch of ‘em. Interspersed on stage, for all the world to see every minute of the debate, were the four empty podia of the front runners. A constant reminder of who cared enough to show up — and who didn’t.

I was mesmerized. For a crusty old Liberal like me, the visual message on that stage was mind-blowing. Then Tavis Smiley elevated the debate format to stellar heights. The first question? He asked each of the candidates to address the absence of the Big Four. If I’d had a bottle of champagne handy, I’d have popped the cork right then. There’s no way out of this, I thought.

I was wrong.

Huckabee was first to respond and was inclusive — and utterly brilliant. “I’m embarrassed,” he said. “I want to be president of the United States, not president of the Republican Party…” He was clearly incensed at the shameful behavior of his fellow GOP candidates and made no bones about it. His take no prisoners attitude, delivered with all the sincerity and zeal of the Baptist preacher he is, had me on my feet.

While the others also shook their collective heads in disapproval and spoke to it, none of them came across with the same depth of feeling Huckabee evidenced. Besides,  he was first and had no time to gather his thoughts. Nor did he have a response to model his own after; he had to wing it and he did. Beautifully.

It’s not easy for a committed white guy who’s anti-social programs for the needy (If we’d all just be responsible for ourselves, keep Dubya’s tax breaks for the wealthy,  privatize Social Security and let big business do it’s thing without a lot of silly regulations, everybody would be just fine…) to relate to a room full of minorities. Most of the candidates proved that to be true.

When the question of what legacy each of them might leave the African American community if they were elected, the answers were revealing. Brownback waxed eloquent about his effort, already underway, to see an African American museum constructed in D.C. — and he would be the president who, at long last, officially apologized for slavery and segregation. Duncan Hunter jumped in with a notion of doing away with pornography, although he failed to make celar why this was an urgent African American issue. He extolled “less regulations and less taxes” as a shiny new legacy for Black America. Alan Keyes said he did not believe there actually is “this deep divide in this nation” and seemed to feel that a same-sex marriage moral compass and “faith” in schools would pretty much do the legacy trick.

It was Huckabee, again, who hit the high point: Access to decent housing, a justice system that’s not weighted against African Americans. I was on my feet again. Whoo-hoo! Housing! All that social justice and justice justice! Honey, I was ready to pull the lever. Or touch the screen. Or lick the #2 lead and put a big old X in the box next to his name.

But something went wrong for me when the subject of Darfur was raised and Huckabee said we didn’t need to be tinkering with genocide there until we dealt with the genocide here–abortion. Scratch the benevolent surface and something’s not quite what it appears to be.

Mike Huckabee may prove to be a real threat to the top tier Repubs. He actually is the “compassionate conservative” the GOP touted so loud and proud back in 2000. He preaches love and he means it, all that “love” stuff. Sincerity is not his problem. He’s Baptist. He can prance and preach, wrap himself in the mantle of Christian love, open his arms wide and hug us right into a born-again stupor.

But he’s that kind of Baptist. Therein lies the flub: A singular religious perspective defining public policy, impacting the law, packing the Supreme Court. That kind of love, no matter how well-intended, will narrow the moral landscape and priorities to same-sex romanticism, save-the babies, preach the biblical version of world history and science in the classroom…

And ignore world poverty, illiteracy, hopelessness, rage and genocide as lesser problems (after all, we want to get to heaven, here) and deny healthcare to all those babies we’re supposed to be saving and send them off to Iraq to fight in the endless bloody occupation/holy war against (t)errorism — because, under GOP management, we’ll still be over there fighting when the next generation is cannon-fodder-aged.

This man is not a change in direction. He’s the same old social sins agenda in a spiffy new outfit. With a cross.

The religious right could well rally ’round this fella. God help us.

The Jena 6 and the Psyche of the South

I am a life-long Southerner. My family, branches both here in South Carolina and in Virginia, were plantation owners; cotton and tobacco growers who bought and sold people, broke families and bodies and spirits for profit. I was raised by genteel racists who still claimed “Our darkies did not want to be free. They depended on us to take care of them. Why, we saved them from the torment of everlasting hellfire when we brought them over here and gave them to Jesus and they knew it! They’d been nothing but heathens, living like monkeys over there in Africa, practially swinging from trees…”

I’m not proud of my heritage. My children were grown, well into their twenties before I ever told them the truth about their ancestors. I have pictures of the old homes in Upstate South Carolina and on the James River in Virginia. The homes we lost in the “War of Northern Aggression.” In the fifties and sixties, when I was growing up, the Civil War was still being fought down here. I lived in the middle of that battle, that bitter war of words against the Yankees and what they’d done to us, what they’d taken from us. I lived the Great American Apartheid. Fear and hatred, burning crosses, lynchings. The noose was a terrible symbol of the dark soul of the South.

I had hoped we’d outgrown all that. Apparently, some of us have not.

Dubya’s New War Plan for Iraq: Enduring Bleed’em

Barack Obama says it best: There are no good options in Iraq, only bad ones and worse ones.

Then there’s the worst one. The Decider-in-Chief laid it on the line for us last night.  We’ve gone from Operation Enduring Freedom to Operation Enduring Bleed’em. A stay-the-course “enduring relationship with our ally” while they fight off Al Qaeda — those really bad guys who want to bring down Iraq’s duly elected government.  Iraqi leaders, he tells us, want us to stay. They want this enduring relationship to go on and on and on. Dubya didn’t say how enduring this occupation is going to be. Unless we count on the reference he made to the next president taking over as Commander-in-Chief of the 130,000 troops on the ground come January 2009.

BUT. General Petraeus says we can begin bringing our troops home. It’s the drawdown at last. We’re all on the same page now. Angry Democrats in Congress, an even angrier American public and those skittish Republicans on the Hill, we can all say we’re friends again because George W. Bush says so. He’s bringing over 5,000 troops home by Christmas! The fact that about half of them were already scheduled to leave Iraq doesn’t mean a thing. After all, he didn’t extend their tours. He’s decided things are going so well in Iraq that another 20,000 or so troops will come home by next summer! The way he figures it, we’ll have about 30,000 fewer troops on the ground before you can say “This isn’t a drawdown, Mr. President! This is the end of your surge —  and the Army told you  they cannot maintain it past March anyway! Don’t feed us a mouthful of crap and call it caviar!”

All we’re going to need, he says, to buy the hardworking Iraqi government a little more time and breathing room so they can finally get it right, is the same troop level we had nine months ago. Before the surge.  And that government deserves all the time we’ll give ‘em. Sure, they’ve failed to meet most of the Bush benchmarks; sure, they took the entire month of August off for a collective vacation from all that exhausting commitment to concilliation, benchmark-meeting and democracy stuff. Sure, American troops on the ground (without a vacation in sight) bought that recreational month of August with their own blood. But, hey, the surge is working and our troops are coming home! Eventually.

A Campaign Commercial I’d Like To See…

Shame you can’t have a 4:20 commercial…

The “Outsider”: role-playing the untainted Law and Order President

So. It’s official. After a protracted lackluster start-up leaves the Right yawning through primary season, a frustrated GOP offers up the Grand Ole Poseur. The Great White Hope. The near-Ronald Reagan hits the campaign trail.

Actor/lawyer/former Tennessee Senator Fred Dalton Thompson is off and running. In it to win it. The collective conservative sigh of relief was explosive enough to alter the course of the jet stream; surely there’s nothing but fair weather and smooth sailing ahead. This guy has it all. Experience on the Hill — just enough, not too much. Name recognition to die for, a face everyone knows and trusts. We’ve seen him in action and we’re impressed. He’s served us well as the serious, thoughtful sage DA Arthur Branch on NBC’s Law and Order. He dispensed golden nuggets of legal wisdom every week for several years, never got flustered, seldom lost a case that really mattered. And every Law and Order crisis was neatly resolved in under sixty minutes. No lie. Watch the re-runs. You’ve got to believe in a guy who can do all that. America loves its bigger-than-life heroes and this fella filled the screen. Imagine what he could do in the Oval Office.

Not only has he got star quality, he’s a bona fide regular guy. He wears blue jeans, tools around in a red pickup truck. He drove that old truck all over Tennessee in his ‘93 run for the Senate. Folks ate it up like a platter of Memphis barbecue. Most never suspected the truck was pre-positioned a mile or so away from Ole Fred’s stumping grounds; seems a luxury car or limo delivered candidate Thompson to the big, red truck and he took it from there. The long, tall, plain talkin’ everyman arrived in red, white and blue average American style. It’s all about image. You have to look the part to play the role.

He’s an outsider, too. There’s no tacky “Washington Insider” tattoo on this good old boy’s forehead. Serving a term or two in the U.S. Senate does not make a man (or woman) one of those tainted insider types. No way. And that’s a fact.

But there’s more to the life and times of Fred Dalton Thompson than stints as a beloved TV DA or another Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-style pol. He’s got a long history — 20 years or so — as a living, breathing lobbyist in D.C. and he played that role to the hilt.

One of his clients in 1982 was the Tennessee Savings and Loan League. On their behalf, Thompson lobbied for a bill to deregulate the S&L industry. The result? The final version of Thompson’s pet bill is widely credited with laying the groundwork for the risky financial ventures, fraud and mismanagement that ended with the S&L collapse of the late ’80s. Regular folks lost money and U.S. taxpayers shelled out around $150 billion for the bail-out. Fred? He got paid.

He lobbied for Equitas, a British reinsurance company handling billions of dollars of asbestos claims for Lloyd’s of London. What profit-savvy insurer wants to face paying full price for all those pesky asbestos victims? Equitas paid Thompson about $760,000 between 2004-2006 for his handiwork on their behalf. And the list goes on. This outsider spent plenty of time and energy peddling influence.

A spokesman for Thompson explains it this way: “Many of the candidates from both parties have been lobbyists or have been lobbied at one point or another in their careers. It is an honorable endeavor that goes back to the beginnings of this republic.”

That point of view makes it all better. My kids once had a penchant for the same “But Mo-om–everybody else is doing it!” argument. I didn’t buy it then and I don’t buy it now.

Still, they tell us, he’s untainted. He’s a different breed altogether: The new, improved outsider-insider. He’s just like all of us. Except that the K Street gang — who’ve bought our government wholesale, kept the costs of gas and oil, health insurance and prescription drugs, staggeringly high or wholly unaffordable for too many of us — rightfully rejoices at a potential Thompson presidency. After all, he might say he’s one of us, he might look like one of us, but he’s one of them.

He’ll only dance his way into the White House if we let him. Maybe we’re smarter than the GOP thinks we are. To quote a very smart Illinois voter about the Thompson campaign:  “What they’re doing is like putting lipstick on a pig. It’s still a pig — and putting lipstick on a pig doesn’t mean you have to take it to the prom.”

A Page (or two) from Dubya’s GOP Official U.S. History Book: Iraq is like Vietnam — only better.

Old George and his minions have been trying to re-educate us for years. Even with his approval ratings in the basement–right under the sump pump– we shouldn’t be jumping to conclusions about what a disaster the Bush years at the helm have been. After all, he tells us, “The jury’s still out on George Washington.” And he ought to know. He’s reading a book. So, he’s sort of like George Washington. Really. A couple of hundred years from now folks’ll read a book about Dubya. Under neocon leadership the Iraq War ought to be winding down about then and everyone will see how wise the 43rd president truly was.

 And they tell us he’s just like Abraham Lincoln, too. Misunderstood. Greatness is too often unappreciated by the masses. In the midst of a bloody Civil War nobody much liked Abe, either.

After nearly five years of taking offense at any comparison between his Iraq War and Vietnam (”What distortion of the war on the ground?” “What quagmire?”), Dubya has penned a new page in the GOP Official U.S. History Book. In a lengthy, didactic History-Lesson-for-Dummies speech before the VFW, after linking his war (and his leadership) to every honorable, justifiable U.S. engagement, he invoked Vietnam:

“…there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam War [This sounds about right.] and how we left. There’s no debate in my mind that the veterans fron Vietnam deserve the high praise of the United States of America [If you're so proud now, where were you, Cheney and the rest of your deferment-loving warmongers then? Those troops you admire-- my husband among them--sure could have used some help.] Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens…

“There was another price…we can hear it in the words of the enemy we face in today’s struggle…those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens on September the 11th, 2001… [In Iraq Dubya still insists it's all Al Qaeda, all the time.].”

W. goes on to make his point clear: We only lost the Vietnam War because we quit–and that cut-and-run policy gives aid and comfort to our enemies today. Once again, victory is ours for the taking. Unless we quit.

There are some similarities between Vietnam and Iraq. In both cases the declaration of war was based on lies. The two Gulf of Tonkin “incidents” were were suspect in one case, disproved altogether in the other. The Saddam-Al Qaeda-9/11 connection was false, there were no WMD. In both wars our military bore/bears the brunt of the battle while a reluctant and/or duplicitous Vietnamese/Iraqi military stood down. In both wars we propped up inept, corrupt governments. In both wars millions of innocent civilians were killed, maimed and displaced. In both wars the official U.S. government spin trumped the facts on the ground. We were/are winning. The successful end– total victory with honor– was/is right around the next bend… And, at the end of the day, the Vietnamese didn’t like us, the world’s opinion of us plummeted and we were at each others’ throats here at home.

And there was one significant difference: Corrupt or not, the government of South Vietnam asked for U.S. aid and intervention. We did not make a unilateral pre-emptive strike against a sovereign nation who never asked us to invade their homeland.

When all else fails, George W. Bush brings the Almighty into matters of policy as he sees them. His VFW Neo-history lesson speech was no exception:

“The greatest weapon in the arsenal of democracy is the desire for liberty written into the human heart by our Creator.”

You can’t argue with God. And, in the Bush version of U.S. History, it is the POTUS who must define what God meant by “liberty.” In the present case, it seems to mean a right-wing version of democracy at gunpoint, a docile pro-American regime in power and the Hydrocarbon Act benchmark to seal the deal.

Iraq is like Vietnam–only better. This time, if the pro-war Right has its way, we can’t lose because we won’t quit. We may never leave at all. Occupation and control of Iraqi oil fields. That’s the new, improved definition of liberty. Believe it. It’s in Dubya’s new, improved history book. 

Fearless Michelle Obama: the fine art of the straight-talking powerful woman

There’s nothing I love better than a smart, strong woman. Well, maybe one thing: A smart, strong woman whose heart is fully engaged. A woman whose depth and character and passion for positive change shine through the gloom of fear and mistrust like a beacon, lighting the way to safe harbor. When the time comes to stand up and be counted, she’s unafraid. I spent some time watching, listening to such a woman, last night.

Michelle Obama. “Be Not Afraid.” Before reading further, take this opportunity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNuqLsOiZ5o –experience the power of a smart woman for yourself.

There’s no way to refine that message, no more eloquent argument to be made for positive change in this country. Without a script, without a pre-packaged, hackneyed spiel spiced with empty sound-bites, Michelle Obama lays out the single best argument for a Barack Obama presidency.

Freedom from fear.

Fear is not a sound basis for choosing a leader. Fear is not a sound basis for foreign policy. Fear is not a sound basis for any public policy. Fear clouds our judgment, narrows our options. Fear has become a tool used by the powerful to manipulate the public, to appeal to our basest instincts. We give our power away out of fear. We compromise our liberty and our values out of fear. We become stunted, suspicious and selfish. We are led to hatred and intolerance through fear. We are led to violence through fear. It’s US against THEM. It’s “America– love it or leave it.” It’s “You’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists!” It’s “Ask the wrong questions or disagree with my war and you’re unpatriotic! You don’t support our troops!” It’s “Elect me unless you want another 9/11!”

It smacks of a new brand of fascism. The old “Might Makes Right” credo. We’ve had enough. Fear has gotten us nothing but an endless, bloody occupation in Iraq, spiralling debt, a divided nation and the fear and loathing of the rest of the world. We have few friends left. We don’t even like ourselves.

Fear works. They’re using it again. Muslims are scary. Iraq–if we aren’t occupying it–is scary. Any nation who doesn’t think the way we do, live the way we do, is scary. Immigrants are scary, especially if they’re non-white. Gays and lesbians are scary. New faces on the political horizon are scary. Negotiation is scary. New approaches to old problems are scary–they’re naive, they’re irresponsible. The dearth of D.C. insider experience is scary. Liberals are both scared and scary. Stay the course and we’ll be safe. The fear factor begins to infect liberals, too. It wins elections. We stoop to conquer.

There is no safety in an environment of fear. There is no honor. We lose our better selves. We let the purveyors of fear-for-power think for us, act for us. They rob us of our common sense and our decency and we let them because it’s scary to think for ourselves. The price we’ve paid for a sense of false security is far too high.

“I’m tired of being afraid,” Michelle Obama tells us. But she has the courage to offer up her husband and her family life for a presidency that will change the face, the soul, of this nation. On the day Barack Obama is elected, she says, we will change the way the world sees us. That’s straight talk from a smart woman.

I suspect there will be another profound change afoot on day one of an Obama presidency: The way we see ourselves will change, too. No more cowering in fear; we’re better than this. Fear had made us lose our way. We’ll come out into the light with the courage to begin anew.

The New Nuclear Option: the war against Obama

Bear with me, folks. I’m apt to ramble a bit here. And I’m more than a little angry at the war games that threaten to reduce the Democratic race to the primaries to, well, a pile of nuclear rubble. The last man standing may well have contracted such a case of radiation poisoning from the fall-out that we’re all in trouble. Or the last woman standing, in this case. Hillary seems to be the primary instigator here. Pardon the pun.

First terrorist strike in the Clinton war on Obama: His obvious (and dangerous) lack of experience, especially in the area of foreign policy. Only a dumb novice would think a policy of open negotiation is a good idea. “It’s the experience, stupid!”

Governor Bill Clinton, running for the presidency:

“I believe experience counts, but it’s not everything. Values, judgment and [your] record…also should count for something…we have to change this country…insanity [is] just doing the same old thing over and over again and expecting a different result…We need a new approach. The same old experience is not relevant…And you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience…”

 Senator Clinton, what’s good for the goose… You can’t have it both ways for the sake of political expedience.

I hate this, Hillary. Really I do. I love the notion of a lofty campaign, a battle of new ideas and ideals waged (fairly) by refreshingly intelligent candidates. No more good ole boy gaffes, no more Bush-Rovian tactics like the smearing of McCain in South Carolina when you can’t beat him any other way. But it appears the Bush-Rovian Method is afoot again and this time it’s one of our own taking the scorched earth nuclear option. I watched the AFL-CIO Forum the other night. The Bush-Rovian Method tainted it for me. I listened carefully to what you had to say. Here’s what I heard–and what I heard:

“I’m here because I think we need to change America. And it’s not to get in fights with Democrats [even when I twist their words, question their intelligence and intent and call them scary names like irresponsible, naive, inexperienced]. I want the Democrats to win [just not that Obama guy who keeps stealing my thunder and is the only real threat to my sure-thing nomination with all his anti-lobbyist, common sense, civility and negotiation hoo-hah]. And I want a united Democratic Party that will stand against the Republicans [sort of like I didn't stand against Dubya and his cronies in the run-up to this disastrous war in Iraq, going along and authorizing the wrong war in the wrong country against the wrong people because, suddenly and inexplicably, I TRUSTED the President...not that I made a mistake, mind you...]. …So, if you want a winner who knows how to take them on [you'll just have to trust me on this], I’m your girl.”

Then, Hillary, you took another shot at Senator Obama for his clarity on foreign policy and terrorism:

“So, you can think big, but remember you shouldn’t always say everything you think if you’re running for president [sort of like nobody knows what the hell I was thinking when I voted to authorize Dubya's war or when I said 'Yes, we really are safer now' a few weeks ago or when I said 'Lobbyists are people, too' so I can take all that dirty, sexy money and still keep my virginity. Just trust me. I think big--but, like ole George W., I don't have to tell you what I think. Or what I'll do. I like to think of it as my pre-Executive Executive Privilege since we all know I'm the only candidate ready to lead from day one. It's national security if I say it is, ya know].

I didn’t feel optimistic about the future during the Labor Forum. Hillary, you gave me nothing much to feel better about. And when Biden and Dodd piled on, doing your dirty work for you, I felt even worse. It looked suspiciously like the Old Guard, the establishment that bowed, again and again, to Dubya’s will, had become their own little cabal. It hurts when some uppity new guy like Obama comes along and has the unmitigated audacity to say your record on Iraq is clearly not such an admirable thing. Especially when he had the foresight to speak out against that war in 2002, very clearly predicting a bad situation going worse and our being stuck in the middle of it at an inconceivably high cost and with no way out. A bloody, costly quagmire. Pretty naive and irresponsible, eh? So, you pile on. You attack him for his willingness to negotiate, for his taking a tough stance on the real terrorist threat and for saying No to nukes against terrorist targets. It seems you want to both radicalize and marginalize him.

Senator Obama’s foreign policy plan is neither naive nor some radical new notion. It’s common sense. There is no country called “Terrorism.” It is not a single nation. It’s a criminal mindset; an intent. All terrorists are not of the same nationality. All terrorists do not live in, train in or operate from a single country. We all know–when we’re not being scared senseless–that there are terrorist cells everywhere. All over the Middle East, Asia, Africa, in Europe and right here. Do we nuke at will, everywhere? What’s the criteria when terrorists are the minority in every region? You must be both terrorists and dark-skinned? You must be terrorists sitting on land rich with oil–or some other natural resource we want so badly it’s worth dying for?

Terrorists are criminals, not vast, state-sponsored armies. We need the military equivalent to beefed-up SWAT teams on gang-controlled turf, not “mushroom clouds.” Obama would use the limited incursion, limited strikes, against identified, active cells which are a clear and present danger when the country in which they are operating cannot or will not do the job.  This is not irreseponsible. It’s been done before. Limited strikes mean limited casualties. Nuclear strikes are another thing altogether.

Campaign wars are a nasty business when we choose the unfair fight. They are seldom fought by the rules or on the designated field of battle. They’re guerilla warfare. Sniper tactics, combined with lethal doses of propaganda–those dirty little under-the-table stink bombs designed to foul up the room so reasonable people won’t hear what’s really being said or see what’s really going on. They’re outta there, fleeing from the stench.

When we don’t fight the primary wars with some level of honesty and sound judgment which serves the best interest of the country rather than personal ambition, then we won’t do any better job of waging the “war on terrorism” than the debacle we’re mired down in now. And that really stinks.

All we can do, in defense of reason over rabid rhetoric, is hold our noses and stay in the fight until common sense–and common decency–win the day.

Greek Prefixes, Smart Women and Obamaphobia

Clever, those ancient Greeks. They gave us art, literature, philosophy and the notion of a more perfect form of government. They gave us a language ripe for the picking. Greek prefixes, Greek root-words: “demos” (people), “kratos” (power).  Power to the people. What a word! What a concept! What’s not to like?

They also gave us the hystera/hystero prefix– which means uterus. Hysterectomy. Problems with a pesky womb? If it offends you, cut it out. Not a bad thing. But there’s also hysteria. You know, that hollering and screaming thing. Tantrums. Panic attacks. General emotional mayhem.  And, for too many lo-o-o-ong centuries, the female’s uterus was the definitive root of all disorganized behavior and thought. The womb made us a tad too flaky to be trusted to do more than have babies, cook and clean. Uterine mood swings and all. It’s been a man’s world.

Hysteria has become an equal opportunity malady in modern times. These days men can be hysterical, too. And those Bad Boys–the ones with all the power and big guns– can whip up a climate of hysteria any time they really need one. Dubya and his cronies have mastered the art. Saddam. Al-Qaeda  and Saddam.  WMD from Basra to Tikrit and the imminent threat of mushroom clouds poisoning every peace-loving U.S. citizen if we didn’t invade ASAP, overthrow that madman with his fat finger on the nuke button and create a shiny, new America-loving Iraq. Quick-like. No time to think. Or ask any questions. They’ve kept us in line every step of the way by scaring us to death. Hysteria works.

The Clinton campaign seems to be sinking into hysteria mode lately. When Barack Obama said Bush’s “zero-diplomacy unless I really like you” policy is a poor approach, that he would be willing to begin talking to foreign heads of state, good guys or bad, within the first year of an Obama presidency, Clintonistas went ballistic. Manic. Menopausal. Suddenly the very idea of diplomacy, of open negotiation, is akin to hopping into bed with a harlot after strangling your wife. Clearly, Obama is too stupid to be president. Naive. Irresponsible. You’d think he must have voted to authorize a dumb, rash war… 

Within days the “Obama will even talk to HOLOCAUST DENIERS!” panic pill was being dosed out like methadone at a drug rehab facility. It’s hysterical.

And it’s sad. I’ve always liked Hillary. She’s smart, she’s tough, she’s capable. But I’m mad at her for using the same old Bush-Rovian smear-and-fear tactics when she’s  scared she might lose a little ground. She should be ashamed of herself. She should be as sick as most women are of the hystera/hystero prefix and its use as a tool to deny us our rightful places in the world of “rational” men. This PMS-style over-reaction, this deliberate distortion of a rival candidate’s intelligence and his intent,  are nothing more than the same peddling of hysteria we’ve suffered for the last 6 1/2 years; it’s Dubya’s “We have to fight them over there so we won’t have to fight them here!” nonsense in make-up and high heels.

It is unworthy of a candidate who says she represents real change. It is especially unworthy of a smart woman who has had to weather the Women’s Rights Wars. The marketing of hysteria for expedience, for ambition, is beneath a strong candidate for the highest office in the land. It smacks of the same old dirty politics-as-usual.

Senator Obama has said–more than once–“We [Americans] are better than this.” That sentiment should surely apply to Hillary Clinton, a powerful woman who is in a position to further the cause for women’s capabilities trumping their wombs once and for all.

Ms. Clinton, the hysteria mode offends us. Cut it out.

Have you met Michelle?

Our little caravan to Peoria yesterday was an active search for hope in a divisive world.  Our driver John is newly retired.  I tried to imagine being his fellow soldier in the helicopter he piloted above Viet Nam.  His girlfriend, Bonnie, specializes in educating those incorrigibles demoted to alternative schooling.  I shared the back seat with Betty who celebrates her independence daily.  She survived a hip fracture with bone pinning last Christmas and manuevers public places by virtue of cane and determination.  I brought my own gray-haired American Healthcare background to listen in.

There’s no mistaking Michelle Obama for someone else.  When she enters a room, “statuesque” comes to mind.  I’m still unable to adequately describe her.  As I recall her powerful message taken home by a packed ballroom audience, I’m lifted by Michelle’s time-changing presence.  Each of us came away knowing we’re connected to the “real thing.”

One becomes immersed in cross-cultural unity at any Obama event.  Women for Obama coordinated a whirlwind schedule for Michelle.  Breakfast in Champaign, lunch in Peoria and dinner in Rockford allowed multi-tasking Michelle to be home in time for tucking Sasha and Malia in bed.

Michelle adeptly wove the story of her South-side Chicago life then to now in describing how two extraordinary people (IMO) met on the job and meshed to produce what we know today.  Michelle has clearly earned her own right to share a table with any elite Politico.  While possessing remarkable poise and beauty, attaching the title of Princess to this learned woman would be an undeserved smack down.  Like many Americans, I came to the event unaccustomed to seeing high-level female leadership (of any heritage) in action.

It would be another disservice to mangle Michelle’s inspiring message here.  I chose to be an event host, encouraging others to contribute to the Obama for America campaign.  My reward was to witness the most powerful woman speaker I’ve ever seen – in my life – ever.

When Michelle described her own father, I thought of Martin Luther King, Jr., a great father belonging to The Ages.  He and I would’ve shared wows of joy.  Michelle talked of the criticisms attempting to be stuck to Barack.  As to the “Is he READY?” and the “Is this country READY…?” Michelle replied, “The best question to ask of them is ARE YOU ready?”

I am – are you?

In case you’re saying to yourself, “I can’t really afford to…” let me tell you, I can’t either.  Here’s how I’ve been doing it:  I almost spent money on clothing for a perceived fancy meal.  I donated that money to their campaign.  I would’ve used a half tank of gas to drive there.  I coordinated a car pool for the day.  Rather than just me having this experience, four of us can now recount it to friends.  After all, it’s our job to help people get ready to change.

As we exited, Betty was beaming as she said, “I can’t wait to tell the girls at Bridge Club about THIS!”  Those “girls” are her elderly Republican neighbors.

“We’re tired of fear, we’re tired of division.  We want something new.  We want to turn the page.  The world as it is is not the world as it has to be .” 

~ Barack Obama

Hope-Action-Change is the Obama family story.  Michelle and Barack are not asking us to do anything they’re not already doing themselves.  I believe their combined messages are our “feet on the ground” keys to success.  Don’t be missing history, hoping to watch it on TV – make a way to be there!

Mitt Romney in South Carolina: “Who’s the dumbest hick in the room?”

Just what we need in the much maligned South. National news coverage of the Palmetto State: The only top tier Republican candidate for president without adultery and/or divorce in his past comes on down to see us–and what does he do? Mitt Romney poses with a Southern blonde doxy sporting a nasty, poorly executed poster that reads “NO TO OBAMA OSAMA AND CHELSEA’S MOMA [sic].”

He did more than just smile big and hug his new Carolina friend, Blondie. He helped hold up the fool poster.

It wasn’t cute, Blondie–and neither were you. Mitt and Miss South Carolina Semi-literate did us no favors. Entirely too many folks living in the rest of the country have seen one too many Smokey and the Bandit flicks. They think we’re none too bright down here. “Put a chain link fence around the South,” someone once wrote, “and you’ll have the world’s largest insane asylum.”  Ugly headlines, along with garish pictures of Mitt and Blondie, blared “Grammatically challenged South Carolinians support…”

Excuse me? Like millions of others, I am a proud South Carolinian. A smart South Carolinian. Why, I can actually walk, talk and chew fatback at the same time. I know how to spell M-a-m-a. I can read. And I darn well read more than the vulgar tabloid headlines screaming for my attention as I’m checking out my grits, greens and hog jowls at Bi-Lo. I learned, long ago, that despite what some folks were willing to write for sleazy publication, no poor little old gal was ever impregnated by a two-headed Martian when she looked up at the sky at just the wrong moment with her mouth wide open. Although Britney Spears’ recent history does give one pause…and she is Southern. God help us.

I can’t say who we Southerners resent more– a dumb blonde redneck who can’t tell a brilliant African American candidate for president from a terrorist and cannot spell her own mother’s name, or the flip-flopping Repub with the greasy pompadour, grinning like a used car salesman at a Shopoholics Anonymous Convention, standing close enough to kiss his easy mark when he seals the deal on a clunker. It’s a match made in pathetic political heaven. They deserve each other.

The rest of us deserve better.

Plenty of South Carolinians were offended by both Blondie’s artwork and her candidate. Romney’s staff did their darndest to spin his way out of it: He didn’t know what he was holding up for all the world to see, they whined. No dice. Smart Southerners are not impressed by the “DUH?” defense. We know a dissembling fool when we see one. Old Mitt, himself, is compelled to speak publicly in response. “Lighten up!” he tells us. He says there are “plenty of jokes out there.”

Oh. It was all a joke. That explains everything. What a relief! So…when some other dumb blonde somewhere waves a poster reading “NO TO MITT NIT-WIT, MORMUN [sic] LIVES AND TOO DAMN MANY WIVES!”– well, we can expect him and his flock to get the joke. And laugh. No harm done.

Mr. Romney, we Southerners aren’t as dumb as you think. Poor judgment on the campaign trail means poor judgment in the White House–and the Confederate buck stops with you. You hugged Blondie, grinned like the Cheshire Cat, propped up her hateful poster. You embraced ‘em both, you own ‘em both. Down here in the South you are what you wrap your arms around, good buddy. ‘Nuff said

Poll Dancing: questions, answers and the naked truth

2008 looms large. Another national election, another chance to have our voices heard. As soon as we know what we think. What we want. Who we want to give us what we want for four years. Lord knows we need a change. Some of us know exactly who and what we want. Barack Obama. Most others, however, don’t have a clue. It’s all so confusing during primary season. Too many choices. Like a huge menu in a Chinese restaurant: nine or ten entrees in Column A, at least that many in Column B. What are we in the mood for?

 Thank God for polls. We see ‘em, hear ‘em, read ‘em every day. They tell us who’s in, who’s out, who’s sinking faster than Dubya in a vat of truth serum. If most people support, say, Giuliani over McCain or Clinton over Obama, we don’t have to think too hard. Or read much. Or learn a thing. Most people must be right.  We can simply hop on the bandwagon. Only trouble is, we don’t know who those most people are. None of us ever gets polled. I can tell you, with all sincerity, I feel left out.

Or I did. Until the second week in July. It was, at last, my turn. Mine. I was polled by the kind folks at Rasmussen Reports. They’ve been tracking political races for over a decade. They are, they tell me, very accurate. I am, of course, thrilled. I like accuracy. And I get to be one of the esteemed most people crowd. Neat. Chalk one very, very smart most person up for Obama.

I take a deep breath, get my trigger finger poised to press #1 or #2 on my touchtone. My nostrils flare like a racehorse. I am ready to roll. First I have to answer all the usual stuff: my age, sex, party of choice, race, income. Then the fun begins…

“Press #1 if you feel the country is on the right track. Press #2 if you feel we’re off course.” That one’s easy. We’re more than off course, honey, we’re off the map.  I press #2.

Now it gets complicated.

“Hillary Clinton chose to stay with her husband despite his infidelity. Does this make you more likely to vote for her (press #1) or less likely to vote for her (press #2)?” I’m stuck. There’s no “If you don’t give a rat’s patootie what she decided to do about her marriage, press #3″ option.  I would never choose not to vote for her over her decision about her marriage, but I am an Obama supporter… I press #2, but I feel a little guilty about it.

It gets worse.

“If Dick Cheney needed a kidney and asked you for one of yours, would you say ‘Yes’ (press #1) or ‘No’ (press #2)?” There’s no “If you’re committed to using both of your kidneys for the forseeable future but would humanely advise him to drink more water and offer to pray for him, press #3″ option. Truth is, I can’t stand that guy. I might whack him one if I got the chance, but I wouldn’t kill him. I’m a really nice woman. I attend church regularly. I hesitate, but I press #2. At worst, I’m passive-aggressive. If he dies, he dies. Besides, there’s always dialysis. He’s made enough Haliburton money on his pet war to pay for it.

I’m beginning to have my doubts about this polling and accuracy business. I imagine hearing this next: “Would you rather shoot yourself in the head (press #1) or vote Republican in 2008 (press #2)?” My trigger finger is getting sweaty.

Then this:

“Are you afraid of circus clowns? Press #1 for ‘Yes’, press #2 for ‘No.’” What the–? What do circus clowns have to do with elections? Did I miss something on The Situation Room or Hardball or Keith Olbermann? Or is there a bona fide phobia involved here? I press #2; the best thing–at the circus–is a good clown. But I worry about it.

And I’m done. It’s over. They thank me and disconnect. I Google “psychology: fear of clowns” to figure out what my answer meant. The news is not good. There is a phobia. Seems the exaggerated-happy-face clown who smiles while he beats up a smaller clown or kicks a dog scares some folks silly. You never know what evil lurks behind that big, red, happy smile.

The only candidate mentioned in the poll was Hillary Clinton. The only issue, her marriage. The only Republican mentioned was Dick Cheney–well, Cheney’s kidney. And the clown? I’m still not sure about him. I think, maybe, he’s that scary guy in the Oval Office now.

There’s a lesson to be learned here. You can’t trust polls. One wrong answer in the Rasmussen Poll and I skewed the results. I should have pressed #1. I’m terrified of clowns.