Sometime around February, I became an Obama supporter.  And by that I mean that I decided to take him at his word and seriously consider the implications of doing politics HIS way.  Mind you, I am used to being on the losing end of presidential politics but I am not resigned to it by any means.  I spent so much energy in a rage over George Bush and the war in Iraq that I think that rage is partially responsible for the terminal cancer I have developed.  Being angry for a very long time KILLS a person.  And I was angry.  I wanted a Presidential candidate who would be an avenging angel, who would smite the godless republicans, who would punish them for their evil deeds, who would fearlessly force them to back down like the pack of snarling dogs they are.

But then, my teenage son, an Obama supporter since early 2007, started to seriously talk with me about politics and he opened my eyes to a few things. 

1.  He, and many other first time voters his age are truly sick and tired of the rage and the passion and the futility of what passes for politics in this country.  He did not then, and does not now, see Obama's refusal to play tit for tat as a sign of weakness.  Where many people see John McCain hitting and Obama not hitting back, others see Obama not getting all caught up in the bullshit, not losing focus, not playing the same tired game, the same tired way.  And they are refreshed and renewed.

2.  The current Obama coalition includes many people like me who are still hurt, and still angry, and still itching for a fight.  Unless we can get over ourselves, Obama is going to break our hearts.

3.  My son, a man of a mere 18 years, once asked me to choose what matters to me more, kicking Republican ass or solving problems?  And if fixing the country means NOT kicking ass or taking names, would I be willing to do that?

And you know what?  This year, I am not listening to the pundits or even my fellow bloggers all that much.  I am listening mostly to eighteen and nineteen year olds who just want to cut the crap and finally see something get accomplished in politics.  Because I am beginning to understand that they are wiser than I am.  And their wisdom comes from looking into tough future we parents have created for them with our heedlessness and our stupid culture wars and our tolerance for the trivial in public life.  They know that living with the consequences of OUR actions is going to be pretty tough and they are hoping that someone calm, cool, and seemingly unflappable like Barack Obama, someone who tells them it isn't too late to fix what WE broke will lead in a positive direction.  And if he doesn't lead, he may at least get the hell out of the way and let THEM lead.

Two weeks ago, I stopped treatments and entered a hospice program.  I am a testimony to the fact that stress and anger can kill a person.  But if  I can do only one important thing before I'm out of here permanently, I am going to live long enough to cast my vote for Barack Obama.  I'm leaving my vote as an offering of atonement to my kids and as a gift of my hope for the future.  Hope is all I have LEFT of the future.

And to answer my son's question, the answer is yes.  If the only way to end this god forsaken war in Iraq, the only way to get universal health care, the only way to fully fund education for every child from K - B.A. is to forgive every Republican sin, then I will gladly do it.  I would kiss Dick Cheney on the mouth if it would get the troops home from Iraq even one day sooner.  And if any of you can honestly say you wouldn't, then you are every bit as full of shit as most people under the age of 25 think you are.

If anybody needs to change, it isn't Barack Obama.  It's the rest of us.  We need to stop being distracted by things that just don't matter and FOCUS on what we want, rather than what we don't want.

That is the end my rant for today.  Thanks for reading.

All hell is breaking loose in Iraq.

Sit-ins, demonstrations in the streets, and worst of all, the cease fire has failed.  General Petraeus is backing off of his prior decision to let troops come home this summer. 

And John McCain says he doesn't care what anyone says, the surge is working.

I learned all of this by reading the front page articles here at TPM.  But all the diaries are about Hillary and Barack. 

I am a new member of this community but, from what I have read so far, it seems pretty clear who everybody is supporting and why.  No one seems ready to change their position on it.  Since most people here are Obama supporters, which is true for the country in general, why are we bothering to engage in pointless disputes with people whose minds cannot be changed by facts?

John McCain is not benign.  He is dangerous and as wrong as wrong can be.  The whole Hillary lie exposure thing was fine.  But why are we not turning that same loving attention to detail against John McCain? 

Hillary is losing and at this point she is less and less relevant.  Yes, keep working for Obama.  Canvass, raise money, make phone calls.  But accept that he will be the nominee and start getting ready to take down John McCain. 

Because he is BAT-SHIT CRAZY!

President Bush on the Senate version of the FISA bill:

In clear defiance of the White House, the proposal from House Democratic leaders would not give retroactive legal protection to the phone companies that helped in the National Security Agency program of warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also threatened to veto any such measure, should it reach his desk.

The Senate last month passed a bill that did provide such protection and also broadened government eavesdropping powers.

Using tough language on a subject on which he has been persistent and unswerving, Mr. Bush warned House members that “they should not leave for Easter recess without getting the Senate bill to my desk.”

He argued that failure to pass the Senate language would make it harder to detect emerging terrorist threats.

“Voting for this bill would make our country less safe,” Mr. Bush said. “Congress should stop playing politics with the past and focus on helping us prevent attacks in the future.”

Is anyone else wondering how it is possible that the government's ever expanding spy powers never seem to result in catching terrorists.  But always seem to be able to catch people like EliotSpitzer in minor crimes. 
I do not believe that expansive spy powers are useful for any other purpose but to harrass, persecute, and prosecute politically active citizens of this country.  That is all they have been used for so far.  Democrats in Congress have begun to see the light.  Senators need to see what is plainly evident.  If it can happen to Eliot Spitzer, it can happen to anyone.

At some point, in every rally, Barack asks his supporters that important question. 

"Are you ready for change?"

Judging by the comments I am reading on the blogosphere, it doesn't look like we are ready to change anything at all.

Here is a typical comment you can read on almost any thread over at Huffingtonpost...
<blockquote>i support barack obama. that said, this constant cowering down to the clintons (like not sticking up for ms. powers by saying something like... these people are calling me things and attacking me left and right.. so stop whineing) is starting to make even me feel weak.
i hate what the clintons are doing to this process, the "kitchen sink" crap. but what is starting to bother me more is the fact that obama is not even trying to deflect these constant body blows.
i understand the concept of trying to rise above it, but, there is a difference in rising above it and appearing weak.
my wife and i are staunch supporters, however, if mr. obama can't stand up and knock these clintons in thier place, given all the ammunition availalbe to do so, how is he going to handle the hardest job in the world?
i'm just saying...</blockquote>

Barack Obama is being tested alright.  We are seeing if he can be goaded into getting distracted from a fight he has in the bag to engage in a fight he cannot win.  What is at stake here is whether the illusion of strength will be allowed to usurp strength itself.  For all of the Clinton campaign's sophistry cannot change the basic facts as of today.  She is losing.

So far, Obama is showing himself to be everything I want in a Commander-in-Chief.  He is slow to anger.  He is calm in a storm of controversy.  He doesn't over react to other people's foolishness.  He doesn't fly off the handle like Hillary Clinton or John McCain.  So far, so good.  If only we had someone like that in the White House on 9/11.  But we had George Bush.  Basically, he is behaving just as he should behave if he takes his own rhetoric seriously.

He is ready for change.  He embodies change.  So, do we think his silence in the face of attacks is a result of strength and confidence?  or is it a sign of weakness. 

Is Hillary Clinton right?

Would we rather have a fighter? 

or

Are we ready for change?

Let's see...she through 'the kitchen sink'.  She went on Saturday Night Live AND The Daily Show.  She exposed his Canadian scandal!  She scared the crap out of voters with her 3:00am ad.  She had her minions out talking and spreading her message on all the news shows with an overwhelming force.  And what did she accomplish last night?

Not one thing.  Vermont trumps Rhode Island in the delegate count.  Her win in Ohio is a stunning underperformance given the effort she put into losing a twenty point lead in the state.  Yes, I know that you are all talking about how racist we are in Ohio this morning.  Believe me.  You simply are not puting last night into its proper context.  The election you need to reference is Ken Blackwell's run for governor in 2006.  As conservative a state as Ohio likes to consider itself, Blackwell, a conservative Republican with the full support of the religious right mega churches got nowhere near the support Obama recieved last night.  As conservative as Ohio white people are, Hillary Clinton should have blown Obama out of the water in Ohio last night.  But she surprisingly didn't.  Ohio is making some real progress in terms of racial politics and in terms of voters trending left if last night's results are real.

And then, of course the narrow victory in Texas.  She practically lived there and that was the best she could do?  Losing another 20 point lead with all the negative campaigning she did?  Damn!

What now?

I mean she has already endorsed John McCain.  She has already tried to make people think he is muslim and that he is best friends with people who were radicals when he was eight years old.  What's left?  Is she going to talk about his mama?  A showdown on the streets of Casper, Wyoming at noon?  The only thing left to her is to get right down in the gutter and just wallow in dirt and filth.

There are facts, and there is spin.  And facts speak louder.  And the facts are that Obama strategists have a plan for this process. The plan always took into account losing in Texas and Ohio.  The facts are that Obama's performance exceeded the plan last night in spite of the negative campaign and having the media turn against him in the last two weeks. 

Things are looking pretty good for us Obama supporters this morning.  I think I will go back and play with the delegate counter games some more!   And then send the campaign another $100.

Hillary told reporters in Texas that only she and John McCain have the experience necessary to be president.  All Obama offers is empty speeches.  I am scratching myhead trying to figure out how the party comes together to support her if she manages to prevail as the nominee.   And if she is not the nominee, won't she just have to sit this election out after some of the things she has said about the nominee this year?

I have read comment after comment dscussing the reasons Hillary Clinton should drop out of the primary race after failing to win big in Texas and Ohio on Tuesday, March 4th.  Comment after comment about the fatigue people are feeling, how ready they are for this to just...be...over.  The Hillary supporters are reading all of this as well and they are forming their strategy accordingly.

Hillary is trying to make herself appear to be a Hollywood monster like Godzilla or King Kong.  The little people keep shooting the monster and throwing everything they have at it, but it just won't die.  That is what she is trying to convince you is true about her campaign.  She sets up a false deadline of March 4th and then she moves it out again.  She lets it be known that she is prepared to fight this out on the convention floor to get her way.  She refuses to allow rank and file voters to determine the outcome of the primaries (unless the superdelegates seem to be breaking for Obama, then she wants the 'people to decide' and tries to seat Florida and Michigan delegates). 

Hillary Clinton is counting on you to give up.  She wants to force a Solomon's choice on Obama.  She is counting on you to do the noble thing and ask Obama to step aside for the sake of defeating John  McCain.  She is certain that election fatigue will set in.  That Obama is just a fad and that she can outlast you.  She is like one of those Texas Hold'em players in the World Series of Poker, trying to bluff you out with a pair of deuces.  Hillary knows what kind of human resources have been mobilized by Team Obama for this week's contests.  She is hoping that by refusing to go away, she will so demoralize Obama supporters that we will not be able to muster up the same strength for the remaining contests.

So.

Is she right?

Or can we manage to open up another can of whup ass for as long as it takes?

 

I know what the polls say about the probable outcome of next week's primary here in Ohio.  But the polls are causing me some cognitive dissonance because they clash with the evidence of my senses.  What I am experiencing is that there are several Clinton ads on television and they get lots of air play.  There are also Obama ads on television and they get lots of air play too.  But  so far, I have gotten more robocalls for Obama (from Mayor Mike Coleman, from State Treasurer Rich Cordray) and a call from an actual human phone banker.  Only one robocall for Hillary (from John Glenn) has come to my answering machine.  I haven't got any calls from a human phone banker from the Clinton campaign. 

I'm the pastor of an innercity church with mostly African-American members so I've been expecting to get calls from the campaigns asking me to allow someone to come and talk to members during a worship service.  Sure enough, I heard from the Obama campaign today.  Again, nothing from the Clinton campaign.

And I am wondering where are these people?  Are they calling anybody?  Are they trying to do any grass roots work at all or are they relying on media buys and appearnces at large venues?  Have they written off my neighborhood?  Hillary Clinton says she is a fighter.  Then why isn't she fighting for our votes? 

I am starting to think Obama might win Ohio.  I think it is possible because Obama has folks out in the community asking for votes.  There is no evidence of a Clinton 'ground game' (as I have seen it referred to in other places).  And I think it will make a material difference in the outcome of the primary next week.

After breaking into Tim Russert and Barack Obama's exchange on Louis Farrakhan to talk about her own experience with the Independent Party in New York, enquiring minds wanted to know more.  Here is what the New York Times reported about the incident at the  <a href='http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9805EED61439F933A05757C0A9669C8B63&scp=4&sq=clinton++%22independence+party%22&st=nyt'>time</a>. 

 

The two candidates for United States Senate sought the endorsement of the fractious Independence Party here today, but Hillary Rodham Clinton used her speech to attack the group for what she said was the ''anti-Semitism, extremism, prejudice and intolerance of a few shrill voices on both the right and the left.''

Mrs. Clinton added that she welcomed the endorsement of the party, but said emphatically that she would not accept it if the party supported Patrick J. Buchanan for president. ''I cannot and will not as the price for any endorsement embrace or excuse those who use hateful rhetoric that separates and divides,'' she said. ''So let me be just very clear: I will not run on a line with Pat Buchanan on the top of the ticket.''

(my emphasis)

It doesn't sound like denouncing and rejecting to me.  And my question is this.  Does she really think no one will check on these ridiculous statements she makes?