Yes, we can.
“We’ve been asked to pause for a reality check. We’ve been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope. But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false
about hope.”
— Barack Hussein Obama Jr., “Yes we can,” Jan. 8, 2008, Nashua, N.H.
Responsible campaign staffers
OK, here’s a good example of why we should not put the current GOP ticket in the White House, at least not with their current campaign staff, who are prone to alleging McCain invented the BlackBerry and The New York Times is not a stalwart rock of journalistic integrity but rather “a partisan rag.”
After Bush spoke to the G.A. and said “We must stand together” — an admirable sentiment, and one I am proud to have my president ask the United Nations — Ahmadinejad took the stage and, well, basically accused The Jewish Conspiracy of bankrupting the world’s economy.
Obviously, several people had something to say about this.
Delivering a speech redolent of classical European anti-Semitism, the Iranian leader accused Zionists of controlling the banks and was embraced yesterday by listeners at the General Assembly. He exchanged a long hug with the Assembly president and was feted afterward with mostly friendly questions from handpicked reporters.
Err, whoops. Heh. Ahem, I said, obviously, several people had something to say about this.
Mr. Ahmadinejad’s speech — in which he accused “Zionists” of domineering Americans and Europeans through their banking and political activities, and predicted the rise of a “righteous and perfect human being” in their place — was denounced by Israel’s President Peres as a return to the language of Hitler and the fraudulent anti-Semitic tract the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
There we go.
Sen. Barack Obama — who The Sun has taken to calling “Senator Obama” on first reference for some reason — “said he was sorry that Mr. Ahmadinejad ‘had a platform to air his hateful and anti-Semitic views.’”
In contrast to that responsible, presidential-candidate answer, what did McCain say?
Well, “a spokesman for the McCain-Palin campaign, Michael Goldfarb,” responded with the rather adult and presidential response, “Well, Our Opponent wants to talk to that guy! What do you all say to that?!”
“It is Barack Obama who would give him the greatest platform of all, an unconditional summit with the President of the United States. Barack Obama’s reckless determination to meet with a man who believes our Israeli friends are ‘Zionist murderers’ undermines our nation’s allies and demonstrates a frightening lack of judgment.”
Good show, Mr. Goldfarb, I’m glad to know John McCain would rather sling mud than show the American people he thinks Ahmadinejad is a nutball.
That damn religious thing
At mass the other week1, the priest began absolutely railing against politicians who have supported abortion, and basically condemning them to live out their days as lepers in their own denomination, and live out their death burning in hell. This is Christianity?
The New York Times, it seems, has heard a similar homily somewhere. They went to Scranton and asked a bunch of people what they thought.
This is really becoming a problem if you consider that when your pastor tells you something, you generally follow his lead. That can be helpful when you seek guidance, but dangerous when it is used to influence a political election. Especially when I imagine about 50 percent of the priests’ political views are probably in line with Democratic views.
“People should straighten out their religious beliefs before they start making political decisions,” (Matthew Figured, a Sunday school teacher at the Holy Rosary Roman Catholic Church), 22, said on his way into Sunday Mass.
I would argue the other way around, Mr. Figured. The Times reports Figured is now leaning toward McCain after his bishop barred Sen. Biden from receiving communion in the area “because of his support for abortion rights2.”
“Getting into Augustine and Aquinas — it is just not helpful,” said Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United, a progressive Catholic group running television commercials that emphasize the church’s social justice teachings.
Now, opening a debate with the Catholic church is probably going to be “distracting.” But, at the same time, it shows people who are not Catholic historians or theological scholars that the church itself has had differing views about when life begins.
I honestly wonder what answer you would get if you ask many of these Catholic voters so eager to be quoted about their views on abortion what they think of the death penalty. Would you get church doctrine: Only God can take a life? Or would you get the more standard: Let the killers burn in hell? An overwhelming number of Catholics, I think, would follow the church. But, and I think this holds true in Scranton — as you might see in the following quote — many would would rather see the murderers dead, like they screamed for Saddam’s head, and lulsted after pictures and video of his hanging.
The choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as Mr. McCain’s running mate had clinched it for him, Mr. MacDonald said. “She is anti-abortion, anti-gay-marriage, anti-Big Oil, a lifetime member of the N.R.A., she hunts, she fishes — she is the perfect woman!”
One parishioner ruled out voting for Mr. Obama explicitly because he is black. “Are they going to make it the Black House?” Ray McCormick asked, to embarrassed hushing from a half dozen others gathered around the rectory kitchen.
Wow, Scranton, The New York Times pegs you as sexist and racist, in the span of two paragraphs! I think they hit closer to the mark than you would have the world believe, sadly.
However inflammatory this might be, I think it is important to point out the fundamental — and therefore calcifying — difference between pro-life people and pro-choice people, because it really is comparing apples to oranges. Pro-life people are anti-abortion, but pro-choice people are not pro-abortion, they (or at least me) are simply not comfortable with mandating something based on religious belief.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof … .
That is, of course, the de facto quote when arguing freedom of religion, but I don’t think it is too far of a stretch to say pro-life legislation respects the Catholic church and its view on abortion. A good measure of what I look for in a president is “The West Wing” episode, “Take This Sabbath Day,” in which the fictional president weighs his Catholic beliefs in deciding to pardon a man sentenced to death.
TOBY
Look, I… I spent the day…RABBI GLASSMAN
You spent the day hoping the President wouldn’t call the Pope.TOBY
You’re damn right. I did.RABBI GLASSMAN
If he had commuted the sentence after talking to the Pope, the worst fears of every non-Catholic who voted for him would be realized.
Look, voting party line because of a candidate’s view on one single subject is not helpful to this nation. And, as that great Catholic Democrat once told us, we should not be asking what our nation can do for us, but what we can do for it. And right now, our nation does not need John McCain. It needs Barack Obama, and it needs Joe Biden, and it needs a forward-looking leader who is smarter than most Americans. Because by God, we do not need my neighbor, Mr. Old-Shirtless-Guy-Sitting-on-His-Stoop-at-5-in-the-Morning, in the Oval Office. We need an Ivy League graduate who rolls up his sleeves and fixes things.
The least we can do for America is see he gets elected.
=
1I am Methodist, but my fiancée is Catholic. I attend mass with her.↖
2Biden does not support abortion rights, he just does not think every last American citizen (and immigrant) should be subjected to his personal religious beliefs. How on God’s great green earth can a Christian argue with that? Oh, they find ways.↖
Ethics and photojournalism, or, "How Jill Greenberg Imploded Her Career By Being A F*cking Idiot"
When I read about things like this, I get a little angry inside. OK, I’m furious right now. Here WE all are. And all of US are trying our damnedest to convince People there is no liberal or conservative bias in the media.
And please, believe me when I say that. There is a bias, sure, but it’s to the story. If it’s the eve of John McCain’s speech accepting the GOP nomination and Biden goes off the hook and punches a photographer in the face, who do you think is going to gete the lede story? Boring speech everyone knows was going to happen, or bloody-nosed shooter with whacky, maybe-crazy vice presidential candidate? That one there’s a no-brainer, yessir.
So when photographers admit to tricking their subjects — whom they were hired to shoot by a respectable (perhaps the — rhymes with tree — respectible) magazine — into having a picture taken looking like a horror movie still, and then go into Photoshop and spray some pink lipstick on him and write a cheeky slogan over his head, and then take another photo and add shark teeth and blood where his mouth was, and then take another photo, and put a monkey over him, and add some poop that looks like a third-grader drew it, and then say:
“Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”
That’s Busch-league SHIT, Jill Greenberg. And I know I’m not the only one thinking you will never again grace the cover of any respectible magazine for what you did. You are the Jayson Blair of photojournalism right now, and the worst part is you don’t think you did anything wrong.
PDN Pulse interviewed Greenberg, where she admits to deceiving the senator
“He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.
Yeah, go figure, a senator’s handlers don’t know shit about professional studio photographer lighting. This is like reading the recount of a kid who laid a trap for his older sister.
Says Jeffrey Goldberg, the story’s author:
“I don’t know Greenberg (I count this as a blessing) and I can add nothing to what James Bennet told the Post except to say that Greenberg is quite obviously an indecent person who should not be working in magazine journalism. Every so often, journalists become deranged at the sight of certain candidates, and lose their bearings. Why, this has even happened in the case of John McCain once or twice. What I find truly astonishing is the blithe way in which she has tried to hurt this magazine.”
I mean, this is an ethical nightmare. Didn’t this lady take that course in college? Will someone please enroll her in one at the community college of her choosing?
More interesting Jill Greenberg information at:
Readying for 60 days of fight, fight, FIGHT
I don’t know about you, but it is different this time for me. Sure, four years ago I was tired of a Republican administration. They had dragged me into a war in Iraq on very thin ice, which fell from under their feet after troops stormed Baghdad.
But it is different this time. This time We are backing a winner.
For the first time, I get excited over the possibility of an American president. It is time to show the world why we are The Free World. It is time to remind the global community why we have a rusted statue guard over the one-time gate to the Land Of The Free and Home Of The Brave, cradling an inscription that promises to take care of those Yearning To Be Free. That is my America, and don’t you dare call me anything less than a patriot for my beliefs.
The problem with John Kerry was he was not presidential material. I am sorry. At the time, sure, he seemed like a good idea, but that was because Howard Dean sort of Hulked out and everyone got scared. Kerry? No offense, but he is not exactly the World’s Most Interesting Human.
Kerry ran as Not Bush, and that, I think, was his downfall. That platform might have worked now, but the point is moot, and, honestly, McCain is running as Not Bush, so it is not a problem. Kerry was not different, and I do not think he had a gleaming vision of where he wanted this country to be in four years.
But I trust Barack Obama. I trust him to give us an America of which we can be proud. Mitt Romney says “unlike Michelle Obama, I have always been proud to be an American.” Well, you know what, Mitt? That is a great line to get a crowd cheering, but I am not you. I am not proud when my government does not see that The Greater Good means listening to that inscription on Lady Liberty and allowing those who are seeking a better life to do just that, not rounding them up and carting them back to the place from whence they escaped. I am not proud when my country thinks making English our national language is something on which they should waste days, and who knows how much paper. I am not proud when GOP leaders stand on stage and tell their party “You can’t negotiate with evil.” I am sure, madam, that the entire nation of Iran is ecstatic you just lumped them together in a sweeping generalization of muslim extremists.
The Bush administration is not all bad, however, and anyone who says differently is undeserving of an opinion on the subject. Bush set aside a national park encompassing Hawai’i's northwestern islands, and it is larger in square mileage than all current federally protected lands combined. While he might have been able to do more, Bush has repeatedly called on Sudan to stop genocide in Darfur, and even made his visit to China uncomfortable on the first day by calling out the Chinese for not doing more for that situation. And I wonder, in ten years, if we will be able to separate the administrations faults from the economic cycle turning south.
I am ashamed when John McCain tries to tell people Obama’s popularity is a bad thing (is there anyone who finds that argument valid? Please do not answer, I do not want to know). Honestly, when you have tens of millions of people shouting a candidate’s name, how on earth could that be a bad thing?
The truth is this: I do not want Joe Nextdoor in the Oval Office. I do not mind a man who might be a bit of an elitist running our country. If you are planning on voting for McCain because you think Obama is a snob, I urge you to reconsider. If you are planning on voting for McCain because you think Obama will, like a good Democrat, raise taxes, know that Obama’s tax-cut plan is one percent less than McCain’s. If you are planning on voting for McCain because you are afraid Obama is not experienced enough at foreign policy, think of the dangers of “Washington’s Original Maverick” in the situation room. And if you are planning on voting for McCain because you are a Republican, period, then wake up.
This is no longer about red or blue states, and it is not about a donkey or an elephant. Barack Obama is the leader this country needs, and he is the leader the American people deserve.
How many times during the GOP convention did I hear booing? How many times did the speaker shout, spitting into the microphone, a derogatory comment about “liberals,” “liberal Washington1,” or Democrats? How does a party so full of anger and divisiveness plan to heal America from the ravages of a rock-bottom economy, global mistrust and two wars on foreign soil fighting against an entrenched enemy?
As Bill Clinton, stumping for John Kerry in 2004, said, when one candidate preys on your fears, and the other plays to your hopes, shouldn’t you be listening to the guy looking forward and giving you hope for your nation?
When one convention is constantly looking toward a future ripe with togetherness and a gleaming vision of America, and the other is showing a video of “September 11…. Nine Eleven,” which party do you think is walking to the future, and which is looking so much at the past they cannot possibly move forward?
I know I am voting for Barack Obama, because I believe in America, and I believe in hope, and I believe in him. What about you?
=
1I love this argument, because up until January, GOP had control of Washington. So, Mr. Romney, when you say you need to kick the liberals out of Washington, and have a GOP-run congress for once, I like to imagine you have some sort of long-term-memory disorder. ↖
Not paranoid*
So a public school district superintendent in Harrold, Texas, has decided to preempt a Columbine-like attack, he would send an undisclosed number of his teachers to an undisclosed private security firm to train them to use handguns, which they will carry on their person — undisclosed — in school. Putting on hold public access issues for now, let us explore how else this is a bad idea.
The superintendent, a Mr. David Thweatt, has a number of whopper quotes in this NY Times article1, so let us start with this one:
“Country people are take-care-of-yourself people. They are not under the illusion that the police are there to protect them.”
No, Mr. Thweatt, the police are clearly there to write traffic tickets, rescue kittens from trees and fine people who leave their parking meter to run its arrow to the zero. What else would they be trained in things like conflict resolution, negotiation, etc.?
Mr. Thweatt also, “considers himself prepared,” not paranoid. Wonderful.
What is interesting is Texas law regarding guns in schools: It bans* them. (*Oh, yeah, about that. It turns out the Texas legislature “carved out an exception” to that ban, permitting “people with concealed handgun licenses to carry their weapons.”) So weapons are not allowed in schools unless they are secret weapons that no one knows about. That sounds safe. Why does it seem like these laws are not there to protect students but there so when some crazy idiot does shoot up a school, the police can charge him with one more thing at trial?
Also, I should point out the heat the teachers pack is not “less lethal” in any sense of the word.
Teachers have received training from a private security consultant and will use special ammunition designed to prevent ricocheting, he added.
So these are not rubber bullets, tranquilizer darts, Tasers or bean-bag guns. The bullets are just designed to not hit lockers, break windows, etc.
Now about those undisclosed details. This man is a superintendant, of a public school, he cannot keep secrets. Texans pay his salary, and Texans have the right to know who he hired to train the peope educating their children how to shoot “bad guys,” as he calls them. (Whenever anyone uses that phrase, you really have to wonder if they have seen just a few too many buddy cop movies.) There is no way he would win if someone submitted a FOIA request, so why make them go through it? Because of the bad guys, obviously.
For the icing on the cake of this “not paranoid” man, he thinks “gun-free zone” signs at schools are, “like saying sic ‘em to a dog.” Are we sure this is not Steven Seagal in disguise? Seriously.
=
1Sorry for the Meta Mark address, I’m typing this on my phone, and until Apple comes out with cut and paste, that’s what you’ll get. I’m not about to retype a 26-character URL. If you don’t trust those things, go to The Times’ site and search for the article. ↖.
Idiots among us
I think the thing that scares me the most about Hillary Clinton’s supporters is their lemming-like qualities. Only this time, the lemmings are not following a leader. Their leader has stepped aside and the lemmings are just tumbling on their own toward the cliff edge.
From the New York Times’ Caucus Blog:
They have been especially easy to find. “I’m not happy with Obama, and there’s something about him that scares me,” said Lola Hopper, a Clinton delegate from Texas, outside the Pepsi Center. She vowed to vote “the Democratic ballot” in November, except for Mr. Obama. She said she is furious, among other things, “at how Hillary was mistreated,” and about how difficult it is to find “Hillary stuff” at D.N.C.-sanctioned souvenir shops this week.
This woman is going to vote party line in November except for Barack Obama, about whom something scares her (read: She does not trust black people), and because there was not enough “Hillary stuff” at all the gift shops.
And you ask why we need an electoral college? This is why: Because, dear reader, idiots roam this land, free as you and me.
Also disturbing: There are either way too many of these robotic Hillary-or-die supporters at the DNC, or the AP is going out of its way to find them. And as journalists do not work that hard, I am afraid to come to terms with the answer.
leave a comment