Dixville Notch voting results - MSNBC just called it...


WOOOHOOOOOOO!!!!!

Yes, we can!!!  Yes we will!!!!

This "small-town America is wholesome and good, and liberal areas of the country are anti-america"  narrative is so painful and disgusting to me that I have to speak up.  All I can think of when Sarah Palin disses big cities and particularly NY are the heroic images of the line of firefighters going up into Tower1 and Tower2 that day.  She may have forgotten, but I sure haven't.

And because I haven't seen an  argument other than "we're all patriotic" - I thought it was time we put it in starker, harsher terms to really highlight the poisonous nature of what she's saying.  Her comments manage to convey that the liberal folks are all elite, rich, ethnic in some way, preying on the hard-working, white, wholesome, conservative America. 

Ad I wish I could run on TV:

"Governor Palin, since you've led a very sheltered life, and you've not been out in the world to anything larger than a village, really, it's not your fault that you don't know what large-city values are.  Let me introduce you to the values of these big cities.  

• We in the large cities favor public transport and use less gas - thereby sending far less American $$$ to those who are actually funding terrorism. 
• We in the large cities have actually lived through terrorist acts - remember 9/11?  And you know what?  The men and women who had to deal with those disasters did pretty damn well.  In fact, they did more than pretty damn well.  And we in the large cities understand we are much more likely to be the victims of a terrorist attack (you wouldn't know - as you don't read and have not been exposed to life outside Alaska, but the WTC was actually the target of a previous attack). 
• We in the big cities give to charity and pay our taxes and give our lives for this country, Ms Palin. 
• Unlike your actual anti-american sentiment - as  your support and your husband's long membership in an actual Anti-American party , whose leader was buried in Canada rather than be buried under the flag of "damned America", demonstrates - we actually are pro-America.
  
• Unlike your actual socialism (taking money from the oil companies and spreading it back to every citizen of Alaska because it's a "common resource") - we support Barak's vastly preferable and common sense approach to taxing the middle-class less, and the heavily rich more, as proportional taxation is a fair and balanced taxation system.
• Unlike your stance that paying taxes is unpatriotic - our values say that paying taxes is fair and American - because we pay for the services we ask of our government. An example of the services our government provides is paying soldiers - and buying them the ammunition and the weapons and the protection they need when they go to war for us.. Those our our values, Ms Palin.  We pay for what we get. We don't believe in free lunches, being given something for nothing - because you know what? That's actually communism. Or stealing.  We'd rather pay our taxes as that buys us good roads, bridges that don't fall down, water supply, garbage pickup, and dare I mention them - mayors and governors and senators and presidents. 
• In big cities we learn that we are a nation of immigrants - and a pluralistic, diverse, secular society.  We welcome and learn how to live with people from all walks of life, color, religion, ethnicity - and we make them better Americans. We have the best damn attitude in the world in terms of our inclusiveness - and you know what? That's what makes people from all over the world want to come here.  And you know what?  That's what's made America a better, stronger, wealthier nation ahead of every other country on earth!
  
• In big cities we have understood why the founding fathers wanted separation of church and state - we see the injustice when minority groups are disenfranchised and disadvantaged.
  

I could go on and on, Ms Palin. There is so much to educate you on! Sadly, that's all the time I have...

This is a memo to John McCain.

John, my friend, it's over.  It's over.

You have now two choices. One will preserve your future legacy to be something positive.  The other will permanently enshrine for posterity your absolutely horrific, value-less, distasteful, dishonorable campaign as our lasting and final memory of you.

Which do you want your legacy to be?

Do you want to be remembered as a honorable soldier who actually lived with values? Some who will be respected for his sacrifice and his servie, for his loyalty to his country and his decency as a human being?  You can turn it around.  You can stop this disgusting excuse you call a campaign.  Talk straight with the American people. Stop lying. Stop making stuff up and stretching the truth to ridiculous levels to make an insensible, irrelevant point that affects noone. Pay attention to what Americans want. Care about your fellow citizens. Listen.  Respect us.  Run, for the four weeks you have left, a decent campaign with integrity. You will not win. But like the Olympics, sometimes it's not only about winning.   For you, at any rate, understand it is no longer about winning. It is only about how history will remember you.

Should you continue down the path you are on, understand this.  History will not judge you kindly.  Even if nothing happens between now and the election, history will not judge you kindly.   You will have no honor (and you claim to value that word), no integrity, no followers who quote you with worship in campaigns down the road by our future generations.

It's your choice, John, my friend.  Just between you, me and American posterity. 

It's over.

and from  South-Central LA.

Think about it for a second.

Would that level of incompetence, inadequacy, lack of respect and brazen confidence be even remotely tolerated by the white majority?  Would David numbskull Brooks be crowing about how resplendent she was?

Would there be ooohs and aaaahs of how fresh she was, how "folksy"?  

[Isn't "folksy" just another way of saying "ethnic while white",  politely?  And isn't "ethnic" just what MSM uses to mean "colored" when speaking of a black person?]

Think about the picture of say, a young African-american woman who spent six years in five schools barely getting a journalism degree, who has a husband who belongs to a group that advocates secession, has five kids, with the eldest having a baby out wedlock at seventeen, and the youngest baby suffering from some disability.

Yes, think about a black Sarah Palin, and understand why it is Barak has to have an  excellent ivy league schooling, be the first in his law school class, be the first black to become Harvard's Law Review President, be a brilliant politician, have above average 3-point shooting skills, have sizzling charm and smooth oratory and an ability to infuse people with hope, have superb managerial and organizational skills, and work *twice* as frigging *hard* and then, dimly, distantly, get grudging acknowledgement that he's qualified to be President, after getting ridiculed for being all "elitist" (just another term for the outrageously offensive "uppity").

He just does, because in this country, there are no black Sarah Palins, not even on the remote horizon.

What is on the horizon, however, thankfully, is the first African-American President. The first black President.  I can't say it without getting chills up my spine. 

I cannot imagine the sea-change that this country is about to experience.  What a profound line in the sands of history!  Nothing will ever be the same again.  May the  ghosts of  our brutal past lay to rest.

And let there be tears, tears, tears, ... as so many personal and moving diaries on this site in recent times have provoked.

It's going to be a new day in America, and I can only hope for the best, for a future in which there are no Sarah Palins, black or white, metaphorically speaking.  Let the Baraks of this country prosper....

So I had previously posted links to Brad De Long's terrific "why Democrats are better..."  graphs.

It's been many years since I saw this.

It's funny and troubling.  I'd be very interested in seeing similar state by state tables sorted on literacy results and other less looked at social statistics.

To amuse and provoke serious thought in those who might not have come across it before:


Ave IQ and 2004 Voting

Another Source

that continuing to say "I've fought against my party all my life, Senator Obama has never fought against his party leaders" (to paraphrase) does not necessarily put him in good light? What's the virtue of fighting your party position your entire life? To me, that means either: 1. Your party has been consistently wrong 2. You have been consistently wrong 3. You might be in the wrong party 4. You failed to convince your party 5. You failed to convince the other side And, brings up questions like: 1. You see things in black and white. How will you govern? 2. You're unable to compromise. How will you govern? 3. You take pride in putting your principles/ideas/desires first. How will you govern? 4. What experience and successes do you have in resolving conflict? 5. What experience and successes do you have in learning from your own mistakes? 6. How much self-introspection do you engage in? 7. What is your definition of leadership? How will you treat people who disagree with you, when you are the leader? Will you have the same respect for their "maverickness"?

This is my reaction to some of the post-debate posts I've read here and elsewhere on the web, as well as the post-debate analysis that I saw mostly on MSNBC and CNN. I'll summarize here (and hope you agree with me), that Obama was "nice" and "gentlemanly", missed quite a few opportunities to jab McCain, should have been more pointed. There has been some consensus from these folks that it was on the whole a tie, and/or worked slightly in Obama's favor. Reaction polls from debate watchers from CBS and Nielsen showed a lightly more insightful, non-pundit appreciation for Obama's overall style, calmness and lack of political killer instinct to go for the jugular. I appreciate all of the above, particularly the folks calling for blood. To them, I suspect Obama has succeeded in becoming just a candidate, and has managed to mainstream himself to the point of ordinariness, whatever his other qualities. For a non-caucasian, however, I cannot process this the same way. I simply cannot trust in the American people to look beyond the fact of his color. Sure, a lot of people will. But to win an election, you need to win the hearts and minds of middle America, majority America. The position of President, more than almost any other choice people make, requires a comfort level with the persona, style and culture of the candidate. They are, after all, selecting someone who represents *them* on the world stage. The face of America. Subconsciously, I'm inclined to believe there is a mapping of father-figure archetypes guiding that decision, influencing whom you feel comfortable with in an authority position. You might hire Michael Jordan to play ball for you, hire Chris Rock as an entertainment act, Johnnie Cochran as your lawyer. For a black man to be elected President of this country, he will need to overcome any and every former negative black archetype and establish an altogether new one - one with qualities of grace, of calm, of intellect, in the political arena. This is more than Morgan Freeman and James Earl Jones on the black dignity index scale. It's dignity - and predominantly, a lack of anger - demonstrated while engaged in bitter, belittling battle. Any presence of anger simply reminds us of the deep social memories of injustice, race conflict. Anger, so rightful when confronted with racism, simply brings race to the forefront no matter the context. The pointing out of injustice also serves to bring to mind the injustices of the past, those so severe that they cannot be brought up safely in polite society, not something you can remind people of and win their likable-authority-figure-who-best-represents me vote. It was in Jackie Robinson's contract that he couldn't complain (I learnt this from Randy Pausch's Last Lecture). Yes, it's been many decades since then. But the first black guy who does something new, climbs a new mountain that involves winning over the hearts and minds of the American people, doesn't get to complain. Doesn't get to act nasty, not if he wants to win. And has to work twice as hard, as Barack understands only too well. Such is life in America.

Just heard White House Press Secretary say in her press conference (8:35AM PT) that it was John McCain who asked for the meeting. This is the meeting that Bush called and invited both candidates to in DC. Hmmmm....

So this set of tables from Brad De Long is simply eye-opening. They should be all that's needed to make a decisive, election-winning campaign argument for voters who care about economic success and social justice.

THERE IS NO WAY YOU WIN ANY FUTURE  ELECTION.

NO WAY, NO HOW. NEVER NEVER NEVER.

We took the S&L. We took the Iraq War.  We took every DISGUSTING ABUSE OF POWER from the BUSH administration and the REPUBLICANS.

ENOUGH!!!

I just asked a few people I know to go to Barack Obama's website to learn more about him. I was talking on the phone so I just asked them to google for his site. Well, if you google for "barackobama.com", one of the first (likely ad-paid) responses is the webpage ""www.barackObama.com". If you're not looking closely, you'll mistake that for his official website. That URL, however, says "Welcome to Obama for America", nothing else, and does not let you proceed without providing an email and zip code. Folks who are just browsing for information get stopped here, not unsurprisingly. I can't blame them, I'd be unwilling to provide an email and zipcode just to look at the site. If this is a sign-up web page from the official Obama website, it should be made clear that it's not the top level official Barack Obama site, and a link should be provided to Barack's excelent, official home page. If it's somebody else's URL, perhaps the campaign could do something to try and take it down, because it's not helping, it's just causing confusion and turning off people who are looking for information. Luckily, I was still on the phone and I could tell them to try another response from the google search - that it was not the official site.

It has gotten too much. With the daily stream of shocking, disturbing revelations, I find myself increasingly sickened. Is this really the level of the quality of this country, the true character of its leaders? Dishonest, dishonorable, disgusting??? And true of McCain and Palin - absolutely low information politicians, for low information voters? Yes, McCain, too. I've been shocked by his ignorance, his obstinacy that he knows things (in his own obsolete sixties, GWB cowboy way). I find myself knowing more than him about events in the world, including politics, world affairs, world culture (with the advantage, I'll admit, of not having grown up in the USA). This is scary, that even I know more... And I can't even begin to voice my horror at Palin's utter idiocy, her extreme ignorance, her immature, bullying ways. You can see Russia from Alaska, and that is the basis of her foreign policy experience???? That she could utter something so shatteringly STUPID is frightening. Did we not learn from Bush? For all those who have said she's a smart, capable woman, you declare yourselves incompetent to judge, or willing to say anything to see your side win. "Elitist" is just another euphemism for "you know more than me, and I hate you for it". McCain and Palin object to a "fat resume"??? When we despise competence, intelligence, experience and skill, we enter the Dark Ages again, ruled by brutish thugs who spit, lie, bite and scratch...

From Robert Schlesinger's column this morning, the only one who seems to have caught this little gem: "`Less noted was Gibson's asking about her comment that, as governor of Alaska, she hadn't been focused on Iraq. Palin responded: Of course I've been focused on the war, of course I've been, as every American has been, since 9/11.' Ummm, one problem there, governor: We haven't been at war with Iraq since 9/11. To be fair, John McCain was focused on Iraq from the start"

So we really fell for it.

On a day in which the Joint Chief Of Staffs, talking on the day before the anniversary of 9/11, admits that we are not winning in Afghanistan, there were 50,000 stories about lipstick. 

If, on the day before the seventh anniversary of 9/11, a hundred thousand voices had echoed stories about the failure  in Afghanistan,  how powerful would that have been!!!  What else is more important, more stark, more tragic about the fiasco that is the Bush presidency??

50,000 voices on the failure to capture Bin Laden. The failure to curb Al Queda. The failure to actually put an end to the constant stream of public relations videos pushed out by Bin Laden and his cronies. Failure to stop the recruiting into extremist, fatalistic,  terrorist camps - how powerful would that have been!

Single-minded focus, on a sad day in September,  before the anniversary of 9/11, on just where we are. What we failed to do.  And how grievously we have let them down, those that died.

There should not have been any other story today.  The story those generals told this morning  was  important, sad,  and  disturbing.   It was up to us - what we talked about, today.  Surely we could have managed that. Surely we could have managed that little focus,  exercised that little discipline on this one day in September.

Surely, on this one day in September  we could not have, should not have allowed ourselves to be distracted - that's the least we could have done. 

And yet, I came home from work and went on the Internet, and kicked off my Tivo. And all I heard was lipstick, sex, lipstick, pig. 

The one powerful moment in time when we could have all stood up and said - this is wrong, this is the status in Afghanistan, Mr Bush, shame on you, that you have so mismanaged this war, the only war that we owed those who died.  

What a country.

If you haven't caught up with your tivo today, run, don't walk.

Jon Stewart's Daily Show today was so brilliant, it should be framed and entered into a Hall of Fame for High Art. 

Barack, if you're watching, just take its snippets (and you'll know which scenes you need), and run them over and over, for the  next sixty days.  You don't need to make another ad, ever again.

I'd like everybody in this country to watch it.  Perhaps we'll reach some common understanding. Perhaps it will be what finally cracks the thick facade of fanatical resistance to logic, sense, truth, and beauty.   Is there a Hall of Fame for  those Qualities?  Because surely, surely, Jon is its one and only resident.

Bless the man and his entire team of writers.  Take the rest of the year off, guys, you've earned it.

And oh yeah, Jon, marry me!!