2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

There's a decent amount of mileage to the idea that Obama's speech was too smart for American politics, sadly. I hope that enough people are tired enough of our politics being stupid to actually pay attention to it and follow the intended narrative.

*Sigh* Dan, I fear you may be sadly OTM.

Victor Davis Hanson: remember Don Imus!

The new sophistic Obama, however, would recount to us all the charity work and good that Imus had once done and still does, that we don't understand the joshing of the shock-jock radio genre that winks and nods at controversy in theatrical ways, that Imus was a legend and pioneer among talk show hosts, that Obama's own black relatives have on occasions expressed prejudicial statements about whites similar to what Imus does, that we all have our favorite talk shows, whose hosts occasionally cross the line, and that he can't quite remember whether he'd ever been on the Imus show, or whether he ever had heard Imus say anything that was insensitive — and therefore he could not and would not disown a Don Imus.

This is the real message of the Obama racial transcendence candidacy.

^^ this is what i'm talking about when i say disingenuous misreading.

Ol' Vic's just unhappy that this little war thing keeps continuing without resolution. He is tired and needs to lash out.

This happened all the time when I was in college.

lol Harvard

I saw that ridiculous comparison start to gain a bit of coverage. National broadcaster who picks on college students on national broadcast and is therefore a bullying bigot is not like niche minister who believes himself to be speaking truth to power in his sermons. Most people get that. The straws (and straw men) these people do clutch at.

im thinking the speech was actually pretty clever in delivering a couple messages pretty simply and clearly - wright is my crazy old uncle who i love but dont agree with and i understand that everyone regardless of race suffers in similar ways - and then surrounding them w/lots of sophistication and subtlety.

compelling that these messages dont really have that much political appeal but are rather spoken in the language of everyday concerns.

ive said it like 1mx on this thread but obama is a fucking ingenious politician.

Meanwhile, I was happy that Obama's speech made the cover of the free tabloid aimed at young city dwellers that the Chicago Tribune puts out, and that the coverage was mostly positive.

"a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that these 'perverse and hateful' ideologies are a result of the conflict rather than the origins of the conflict? How much sense does it make to talk about radical islamism in 1948? Nationalism, yes, but the Al-Qaeda types come about later, and emerge from conflict.

Either way, it's not a big point in his speech, and it's wrong to focus too much on it. But I don't think it helps to counter a worldview that blames the middle-east on Israel with one that blames it on islamism.

man, whatever, the israel thing was necessarily because of the legions of assholes painting wright as anti-semitic - if you genuinely think obama is going to govern as some kind of zionist lieberman type u madd

Yeah, I understand why he said it, and I think it was necessary. I think the statement was incorrect, but that doesn't mean it wasn't expedient.

and what otm. what obama needs right now is just one person from the anti-defamation league to come out and say "dude did alright we trust him" and this *could* end the news cycle.

all events and actions have myriad causes some of them stretching back hundreds or thousands of years - but once you start behaving like al quaeda et al you lose the right to blame - which is obamas point here

sure israel has been horrible but to look at all the other horrible actors in the middle east and then point at israel is retarded

i mean we could just all point at hitler - pretty much everyone hates him right

I know I do, the Nazi fuck!

Now, turning from God and race, back to Mammon... why are some of Wall Street's most nefarious firms stuffing Obama's coffers? Pam Martens of Counterpunch:

On February 10, 2005, Senator Obama voted in favor of the passage of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005....

Senator Obama graduated Harvard Law magna cum laude and was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. Given those credentials, one assumes that he understood the ramifica­tions to the poor and middle class in this country as he helped to gut one of the few weapons left to seek justice against giant corporations and their legions of giant law firms. The class-action vehicle confers upon each citizen one of the most powerful rights in our society: the ability to function as a private attorney general and seek redress for wrongs inflicted on ourselves as well as for those similarly injured that might not otherwise have a voice....

So, how should we react when we learn that the top contributors to the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under predatory loans? How should we react when we learn that on the big donor list is Citigroup, whose former employee at CitiFinancial testified to the Federal Trade Commission that it was standard practice to target people based on race and educational level, with the sales force winning bonuses called “Rocopoly Money” (like a sick board game), after “blitz” nights of soliciting loans by phone? How should we react when we learn that these very same firms, arm in arm with their corporate lawyers and registered lobbyists, have weakened our ability to fight back with the class-action vehicle?

...Who better to sell (Wall Street's) agenda to the millions of duped mortgage holders and foreclosed homeowners in minority communities across America than our first, beloved, black president of hope and change?

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16601

http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=548&Itemid=1

GODWIN

NEW THREAD

lol

Sure, but to say that the conflict "emanates" from radical Islam - ie the source or origin of the conflict is radical Islam - is just as dumb as the anti-zionist explanation. When a conflict has involved many generations, dozens of administrations of dozens of countries and millions of people, it no longer makes much sense to talk about blame one way of the other - and that certainly isn't the way to solve anything. But like I said, it was a small art of a speech and I understand why he had to say it, I just disagree is all.

x-posts, obv

i dont think he was using emanate in a historical sense here - more like where the hate is radiating from

not that im saying you can really separate these conflicts from their histories

Obama, today:

There is a security gap in this country – a gap between the rhetoric of those who claim to be tough on national security, and the reality of growing insecurity caused by their decisions. A gap between Washington experience, and the wisdom of Washington’s judgments. A gap between the rhetoric of those who tout their support for our troops, and the overburdened state of our military.

http://thepage.time.com/full-text-of-obamas-iraq-speech/

(x-post) Yeah, I guess that makes sense. Anyway, nothing more boring than talking about the middle east. Back to polls, graphs and zings...

lol yah

re obama on national security: wow someones not afraid of heavy lifting

"Sen. Obama and his campaign like to talk about transparency. We call on him to back up his words with action and release his schedules and other records from his time as an Illinois State Senator."

oh noes they want schedules!! lol

huckabee on Obama's speech and Wright:

HUCKABEE: (Obama) made the point, and I think it's a valid one, that you can't hold the candidate responsible for everything that people around him may say or do. You just can't. Whether it's me, whether it's Obama...anybody else. But he did distance himself from the very vitriolic statements.

Now, the second story. It's interesting to me that there are some people on the left who are having to be very uncomfortable with what Louis Wright said, when they all were all over a Jerry Falwell, or anyone on the right who said things that they found very awkward and uncomfortable years ago. Many times those were statements lifted out of the context of a larger sermon. Sermons, after all, are rarely written word for word by pastors like Reverend Wright, who are delivering them extemporaneously, and caught up in the emotion of the moment. There are things that sometimes get said, that if you put them on paper and looked at them in print, you'd say "Well, I didn't mean to say it quite like that."

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But, but, you never came close to saying five days after September 11th, that America deserved what it got. Or that the American government invented AIDS...

HUCKABEE: Not defending his statements.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh, I know you're not. I know you're not. I'm just wondering though, for a lot of people...Would you not guess that there are a lot of Independent voters in Arkansas that vote for Democrats sometimes, and vote for Republicans sometimes, that are sitting here wondering how Barack Obama's spiritual mentor would call the United States the USKKK?

HUCKABEE: I mean, those were outrageous statements, and nobody can defend the content of them.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But what's the impact on voters in Arkansas? Swing voters.

HUCKABEE: I don't think we know. If this were October, I think it would have a dramatic impact. But it's not October. It's March. And I don't believe that by the time we get to October, this is gonna be the defining issue of the campaign, and the reason that people vote.

And one other thing I think we've gotta remember. As easy as it is for those of us who are white, to look back and say "That's a terrible statement!"...I grew up in a very segregated south. And I think that you have to cut some slack -- and I'm gonna be probably the only Conservative in America who's gonna say something like this, but I'm just tellin' you -- we've gotta cut some slack to people who grew up being called names, being told "you have to sit in the balcony when you go to the movie. You have to go to the back door to go into the restaurant. And you can't sit out there with everyone else. There's a separate waiting room in the doctor's office. Here's where you sit on the bus..." And you know what? Sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment. And you have to just say, I probably would too. I probably would too. In fact, I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder had it been me.

MIKA: I agree with that. I really do.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: It's the Atticus Finch line about walking a mile in somebody else's shoes. I remember when Ronald Reagan got shot in 1981. There were some black students in my school that started applauding and said they hoped that he died. And you just sat there and of course you were angry at first, and then you walked out and started scratching your head going "boy, there is some deep resentment there."

i heard that hillary has like a cabinet drawer full of skee-ball tickets that she's hidden from everyone except the chuck e. cheese redemption center

A Huck/Obama contest would have been pretty interesting.

yah it totally wouldve

the FOIA requests for Clinton's schedules were made back in 2006, and this was really set to occur without prompting from either campaign. And FWIW, Clinton camp is being a little too self-congratulatory about its transparency when the disclosure was the result of a FOIA request.

holy shit re:scarborough/huck

Props to the Huck for that.

Scarborough is an oaf, but that is an exchange I can't say I'd ever have thought I'd see.

what obama needs right now is just one person from the anti-defamation league to come out and say "dude did alright we trust him" and this *could* end the news cycle.

-- YGS, Wednesday, 19 March 2008 15:27 (26 minutes ago)

yeah good luck with that... dana milbank at a 3-way surrogate QA on israel. Dan Kurtzer for Obama, Ann Lewis for HRC, Lawrence Eagleburger for McC:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR2008031702440.html

The skepticism continued through the question time. Daroff said he had "heard in the hallways here" that Obama "doesn't see the U.S.-Israel relationship as much of the mainstream of the Senate or the Jewish community sees it."

Kurtzer blamed such sentiment on "attack dogs" and writers of scurrilous e-mails. "He's right within the mainstream of American society and Jewish community concerns," TBA said.

Next question to Kurtzer: Obama's assertion that he needn't have a "Likud view" -- that of Israel's right-wing party -- to be pro-Israel. Kurtzer explained that Obama wanted to see a "plurality of views." Silence in the room.

To that, Lewis retorted: "The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties." The audience members applauded.

Eagleburger piled on. "There's a distinction between those you do talk to," he said, "and those who declare themselves as intent on the destruction of the state of Israel. And if that's their policy, I think we ought not talk to them." More applause.

A conference attendee from Richmond pressed Kurtzer on Obama's "judgment about not disavowing Reverend Wright's views earlier." Another question prompted a back-and-forth about whether Obama had been advised by Brzezinski, who won the enmity of pro-Israel groups for, among other things, accusing Israel of the "killing of hostages" in Lebanon.

Ywah, color me a little shocked.

Hopefully Obama's defense speech will get the attention it needs - probably it won't, though.

jesus christ, i hope she didn't mean that the way it came out

shocked in ref to Huck exchange xp

notes on defence speech:

i) it's dealing with the good old bush-era conceits WITHOUT ACTUALLY USING the terms 'war on terror' or 'axis of evil'
ii) "First, in addressing global terror and violent extremism, we need the kind of comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy I called for last August. ... We need to give our national security agencies the tools they need, while restoring the adherence to rule of law that helps us win the battle for hearts and minds. This means closing Guantanamo, restoring habeas corpus, and respecting civil liberties. "

i may be reading too much into this, but the idea that it's necessary for the eh war on terror to have moral accountability to 'win' it is a pretty good elevating-the-discourse move

iii) it's very concrete for an obama speech, in terms of 'as president i would do x, y, z'

Obama's approach is very similar to the one I was hoping for in 2002.

iv) not as rhetorically amazing as the race speech, unfortunately
v) full of usual useful stuff for people to meaninglessly pick at, - here's a list - positive mentions of nixon and reagan, america 'facing down fascism', also 'shining beacon of democracy during cold war', american-focussed historical problems viz. how long was world war ii again, etc -

here's the vid of Huck on Joe Scar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTFLOu8fjxU

I'm guessing you're all almost done w/ the Counterpunch money-trail articles.

first one to REAL WORLD! buys lunch

wright discussion starts at about 3:20 xpost

Just came here to post this article about that Ann Lewis quote re: Israel

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/18/top_clinton_deputy_the_role_of/

Huckabee is almost the epitome of a rational person whose beliefs are antithetical to mine (I say "almost" because I am not convinced he's rational).

Huckabee should run for Senate when his governorship term is up - he could become the new McCain - ie., the Dem's favorite Republican maverick.

he should replace jay leno as host of the tonight show

he's more rational than tyra lol

damnit I want to read that TPM thing about the Israel quote but I keep getting a browser error. Fuck an Internet Explorer.