i'm with you, my friend. Let fateful tuesday be past us, and let it be decisive and let us not have to be so splintered even amongst this thing we call "us."
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

[Hangs head for using obscure Boomer reference. I suck, I know. I deserve to eat dogfood.]

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

For why Hillary should be president. There's too much, I'm trying to whittle it down.

1. Her 35 years in the thick of politics and public service.
2. Her experience with handling a hostile press effectively.
3. Her will to fight and fight well.

Those are the no-reference positives. Meaning we don't have to beat up on Obama to sing her praise.

That said, the comparison positives:
1. She isn't supported by the D.C. Establishment, Talk Radio, or the 'Liberal Media' like Obama.
2. Her rhetoric doesn't rely on capitulation and forgiveness like Obama.
3. She isn't talking 'unity' out of one side of the mouth and using smear tactics out the other like Obama.
4. She is a graceful winner and loser, unlike Obama.

I'm trying to figure out a positive way to say all this, but I am failing miserably.

Mean to say 'off topic'. [/sheepish]

... I missed the whole Firesign Theatre thing, except for what I'd heard oft-repeated by others, like "the far-flung Isles of Langerhans" and "Department of Redundancy Department."

I'm struggling with this too.

What I feel is that for all her faults, I know Hillary, and that this is no time to risk entrusting the country to someone I don't know. I don't feel that I know Obama and the more I look, the less I like what I see.

And almost the entire Village jumping on the bandwagon doesn't make me feel any better; the Village is definitely not part of the solution.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

I can't believe that *Lakoff* is on the O'Bandwagon.

Many in the blogosphere believe that Lakoff-master Obama is a progressive and his current GOP spin is an elections only tactic. We pose this duality differently. Can a GOP-heroin addict ever recover? Like VastLeft, I have my doubts. Is it possible that the GOP branding is to the bone?

I wish I had more time to go through Lakoff's whole post but I have to go make some chicken wings and drink heavily, which is my patriotic duty.

My sense is that Lakoff is tired of the clumsy, losing and ineffectual traditional (last 20 years) Dem strategy which Hillary still embodies.

Say what you will, but Obama and his campaign are tight, and they know how to use frames and manage their message (and the media) to achieve their goals.

Unfortunately what escapes Lakoff is that Policy is ALL that matters. Policy is what impacts citizens' lives.

Again I think this is a reaction to the Dem history of policy wonking and triangulating itself to death which results in no good policy being passed, lost elections and voters thinking candidates are full of shit.

Obama is bypassing the whole policy thing, by speaking vaguely about specifics if at all, and focusing almost exclusively on messaging.

Reagan was a "good politician" as far as at getting himself elected, and so was Bush for that matter. But they both sucked at governing which is the only thing that matters at the end of the day.

What the progressive movement should be doing is pushing for good policy outcomes, not better mindfucking of the electorate.

In your pincer strategy...

http://correntewire.com/progressive_stra...

The policy side is all about moving public opinion where it ought to be. Is it fine for the candidates (the electoral side) to push the Overton window rightward? That to me, is the mindfuck. Is that what you mean, or maybe the opposite?

And speaking of old frames, why do we accept that the Dems are losers? Two narrow and disputed presidential elections and a strong victory in 2006 doesn't sound like we're really that Charlie Brownish. And accepting the Charlie Brownish frames made the likes of Gore into much lesser candidates than they needed to be and were capable of being.

VL,

I don't mean to ruin the Tuesday suspense for you, but yes, you will be getting your "more conservative than McCain" candidate as the heir apparent.

Hilary will be crowned the inevitable winner. As well as McCain.

I know I'm not a political pundit expert, but you can see how far back I pointed to McCain and the media's inevitable narration about how he came from behind. This whole story had been very clear to me for a long time.

The only new twist is the recent NRCC emerging scandal and how much of that will fall on McCain people. (This will be a huge fall out).

My new name for Obama until he wins the nomination. Not mature, I know, but it describes him exactly.

(at least for now)

I must register my agreement with you on the Lakoff article. It is truly disgraceful.

I have made my decision on the basis of "perceived electability", somewhat along the lines of Bob Somerby who proclaimed that in a sane world he might prefer Clinton, but in this world, it's not going to work. On policy there are real differences, but these differences aren't so very large. At least that's my rationale du jour.

But just where the hell does Lakoff get off accusing Clinton of triangulation after just excusing all of Obama's moves toward Reaganism and Republicanism? Argue whatever you want about electability and inspiration but at the end of the day triangulation is triangulation.

There's framing and there's putting lipstick on a pig. Embracing "framing" does not excuse us from a duty to be honest - otherwise, it's just no different from what, in the good old days we used to refer to as Madison Avenue.

Polls show Obama and Clinton both losing to McCain by essentially the same amount. How the hell is a man whose entire campaign is a house of cards dependent on an outrageously sympathetic press going to withstand the right-wing noise machine? Obama is a blank slate: just as his supporters can project onto him whatever they want, the GOP will be able to do demonize him with abandon--and this was before being endorsed by Teddy Kennedy, MoveOn.org, and embracing driver's licenses for illegal immigrants (to name a few).

I'm not saying Hillary Clinton isn't hated by the right or that she's significantly better, but I honestly don't understand how people believe Obama will be any better than her against McCain of all people, a man who's still adored by the press and preferred by Indys and moderate Republicans.

Although my gut tells me Obama will win the nomination, I'd love HRC to go against McCain not only because she's simply the best candidate in terms of progressive policies and rhetoric but part of me wants to see her battle it out against the man who made that cruel joke about her beloved lil' Chelsea. Remember? McCain "joked" in 1998: Why is Chelsea so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/06/25news...

I'd bring out the popcorn for those debates. You know she'd kill him.

we'll likely only appoint pro-choice judges to the SCOTUS. hillbama winning the general buys me that. everything else i care about? i'm not holding my breath. perhaps i can count on 'fewer crony incompetents heading up federal departments.' that's nice too. but when i tick off my list oof issues that matter, i don't expect great change or "progress." the war/occupation, the growing prison-security-MIC, the Constitution, the economy for the bottom 80% of this country, gay rights, creeping theocracy, public education...no, i've already read that it's "impossible" for the next dem prez to make any significant policy based progress on those issues, mainly because there isn't any money left and no one will lend the US any, thanks to bush's many messes.

so hillbama to me is a meaningless choice. i'll vote against the republican in november, i won't lose any sleep over which one of them represents that action on my ballot. horserace watchers can enjoy the show over the summer and fall, but it's increasingly clear that in terms of my life as a Little Person, the national game is meaningless hoo-ha.

lets remember what h.d.thoreau said, at the end of the day. voting is not the end of our civic responsibility. it is only a symbol of what we want to see happen. the rest is up to us, every day in our lives and in our communities.

well...thats not really what he said. i added a bit. but the core is his.
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

"Polls show Obama and Clinton both losing to McCain by essentially the same amount."

There was a poll on Stephanopoulous today showing Obama beating McCain by 3 and McCain beating Hillary by same margin.

Yeah, I know he's untested, and his negatives are unexplored yet, but I think he might show up well against McCain.

Either decision is defensible. Frankly, I'm starting to feel almost PROUD of being wishy-washy about this. I think the strong partisans of either candidate are wearing rose-colored spectacles. We've got a fight coming up either way and we'd better get ready for it.

sTiVo was the anonymous coward just above. Sorry.

my rose is in my brain.

tho i'm not a strong partisan. just a flaky artist type.
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

So I get to talking to a good friend and she exclaims over how I'm voting for HRC. She says its Obama all the way, and begins rattling off things like:

1. Cronyism from the insurance companies
2. Wavering on issues like Driver's licenses
3. Bill and Hillary are both LIARS about Iraq
4. Hillary voted yes on the Iran Army Terrorism label
5. Hillary and co are sleazy and slimy politicians
6. No independents will vote for Hillary; they all love Obama
7. Hillary will drag the ticket down against McCain; Obama will beat McCain
8. Hillary is doing push polls in Los Angeles
9. Obama is about Change!

And more.

I answered: Well if Obama is about changing the current situation in D.C., why is the establishment (the Village, the Librul Media, and Talk Radio) in support of him? Why would they want to change what has been a pretty good party for them all this time?

By this time I was talking to my friend's husband, who is a volunteer for the Obama campaign. I was getting the whole shpeel. I told him to send everything he has to try to convince me, and if I get it I'm going to be posting it at my blog. All are welcome to join in the pull-apart.

here.

To be honest, I'm a bit disappointed your list didn't include "Fired up, ready to go!"

Seriously though, this whole, "The Clintons are the children of Lucifer while Obama is the Chosen One" is disturbing. You can't reason with these people--at all. Honestly, I'm waiting for Tom Cruise to endorse Obama on behalf of Xenu.

Their rabid displays of utter hate and blind devotion is why they'll win on Tuesday, including CA. You can't beat crazy. You. Just. Can't.

P.S. #8 is just bullshit. If you read the LAT blog there's no proof whatsoever that there's even push polling being done let alone that it's being done by the Clinton camp. The comments though are filled with, "She's sunk to a new low! I'll never vote for her!"
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/3/19331...

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

Never mind.

And my God. Push polling. Oh, the humanity.

Not fair to say can't reason with any of them. But for some of them, criticizing Obama is like criticizing their lover. Bizarre.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

1. Do you think Obama is a "transformative" candidate?

If yes, how so? And race/age/charisma don't count (unless you want to match that up against gender and standing up to the best-funded hate machine in American political history, and unless you want to admit that it's not his policies or strength of character that make him a standout). What of a substantive nature is he transforming and how?

2. Have you noticed that Obama frames almost every discussion in accordance with rightwing memes?

If not, where have you been?

No need to post on my blog:

http://contrapuntalnews.blogspot.com/200...

I'm sorry to say my friend said: "The only suggestion I might provide to you
is to apply the same level of critical scrutiny to Hillary as you are
currently applying to Obama and I am convinced that you will change your
mind."

It was a little disconcerting to think that just because I don't support Obama I'm being intellectually dishonest with myself... But I don't want this to be a war. I just want to be able to tell him that this list isn't worth anything.

nezua -

Did you think I was referring to you? Far from it. I almost did a "what nezua said" on your last post. You're right.

Neither one of these pols is going to shove the Overton Window left by himself, and I doubt Edwards would have either. It's our job.

hi stivo

no...i didnt think you were referring to me. i just...lately i've felt caught up in the feeling of hope and optimism. its not really because of the man obama, but he is pushing forth with that vibe, and man, i'm digging it. the fear and terror of the last eight years has been fucking with my already fragile mind. i'm serious. its been bad for me. maybe when we're a little out of it, past it, i'll write on just how bad its been for my head. from when i lived in nyc in 2001 up to now. its been a progression of...cant find a word. its been bad for my head.

so i'm really into the "we can do," and the hope and the yes we can right now. and i know its easy for peopel to mistake it as, well, being like some others right now or others they know, or my blind belief in the godliness of obama...whatever. sometimes its so hard to remind people we are all different, and to refer to nuance once in a while.

but really, my need for positivity is purely personal. so i felt the need to respond to the rose glasses thing, but No, i did know you were not referring to me. thank you for asking, bro.
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

My gripe with the hopey changey stuff is that it fundamentally means forgive and forget the sins of the corrupt, ruthless, racist, classist, sexist, authoritarian conservative movement.

That's one of the last things I'm hoping for.

Hard work can make a difference....

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

well, i'm not here to convince anyone. these things can be very personal. i'm fine with what you believe and do. i'll listen when you share your experience. i wont be told what to think or do. or bullied or slammed (not saying ustedes do this), and i'll expect friends to listen to my own experience and possibly allow that it is as valid as what drives them.

in the end, these men/women in power will always do stuff to piss us off and let us down. no matter who they are. the bulk is on us, we should not sublimate too much our dreams or work. whomever the president is, we'll still need to pressure them in many ways. and we'll still need to get up on our feet and do the work of making change in our own lives and communities.

i look forward to seeing hopeful essays in many places, i'm sure. regardless who the president is.
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.