Thursday, January 31, 2008
Let us be clear.
John Edwards' supporters are NOT going away and will remain a viable force to contend with.
For Hillary and Obama supporters who have contacted me looking for support?
At least have the class to remain silent simply out of respect - 24 hours would be nice.
Remember, fellow Americans. You reap what you sow.
I have ZERO tolerance for racism.
I have ZERO tolerance for uninformed voters. Do me a favor. Just stay home on Election Day. We needed your voice in the trenches. But now you come forth? Don't expect ME to provide color for YOUR transparency. Not now. Not ever.
Facts are welcome.
Go, John Edwards. We've got your back.
"There is nothing worse than gangrene of the soul."
Mike Malloy 1/20/05
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
Martin Luther King
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Today is a day when I want to throw open the window, stick my head out and yell at the top of my lungs, "Wake up America, we've been fucked!" Yep, that's my first impression on hearing that John Edwards has suspended his race for President.
I want to yell out to everyone, "I'm done! I won't play this game any more!"
Main Stream Media (MSM) has won and unfortunately, they will determine who wins the end game too. They did this in 2004 and are even better at it now in 2008. The fix is in as far as I can see! If we vote for one of MSM's chosen candidates, they have won AND if we don't vote, they have won! You'd think people would have wised up to this by now.
Perhaps had MSM let John Edwards have something NEAR the media time they gave the other two candidates, Edwards just might have had more votes and more delegates. God forbid that could happen! Perhaps Edwards would have won a couple more states! He or She who gets the media time, gets not only the votes, but the money. Cut a candidate off from MSM and you can expect them to fade away. It saddens me that it appears Americans today are not smart enough to think for themselves! But hey, why bother when you can turn on the tube and have some talking head tell you what to think and what to do.
It reminds me of Wal-Mart and how once they run out of your favorite brand, they don't restock, they make you buy up all the other brands first and then they still don't restock your brand. Well, that's what this reminds me of. MSM dumps all the canidates you like and then make you choose from the ones they want to sell.
Let's see, I could vote for Billary. You know the woman who is all for change. Change? She's tied to the status quo! Change my foot! But people will tell me that I can get two for the vote of one. Frankly folks, I'm sick of dynasties! Let's go with someone NEW! Bush - Clinton - Bush - and Clinton again? Hillary is so mired down in status quo that it's a miracle she can pick up her feet to walk. A strong DLCer who backs the corporations. That doesn't represent me! NO THANK YOU! As a woman, however, it pains me deeply not to be able to support a woman for president.
So now, that leaves me with the boy wonder! Obama. You know, when I first heard him at the Democratic Convention, I thought -- gee, this guy really might be the future of our country. So, I decided to watch him. And watch him I did. Especially in the senate hearing back in 2005. I watched him in hearings with Condi Rice and got to see first hand what a whimp he was as he held out his hand to the other side. At that point in time, I realized he was nothing but a lot of hot air! That brings me to words . . .
I remember him saying, "There is no liberal America, there is no conservative America, there is only the United States of America" Well, let me tell you the straight facts: There IS a liberal America, there IS a conservative America, there IS a rich America, there IS a poor America and these are the people that make up this country. If one can't admit to that, what chance do they have of making real change? Pretty words don't always paint a truthful picture.
And now let's get on to the words of change and hope! Who in this country is not for change and hope?
Remember George Bush when he was running for President? He was the compassionate conservative, he was the Uniter that could reach across the aisle. Plenty of pretty words, just like Obama, but none of them were true. Well, here we have Obama, and God help me as to how many times in one speech he uses the words HOPE and CHANGE. (what a great drinking game this would make)
What I think has happened here, is that Obama became no more than the figment of people's imagination. What is a figment of imagination? It's when people put their expectations, their hopes and wishes onto something and make it real in their mind. And that's what people are doing with Obama. Notice that his speech patterns are hypnotic, but hey, he makes people feel good. And, we all know if he's for hope and change, then he must be for this and for that. Ask them a question about what he has done on a certain topic and they will say, "but he is for change, he has hope and believes we can make change." "He has a plan." Well, pray tell, what is that plan? "Gee, I don't know - but he has to have a plan!" Sure! Folks, it's all WORDS! and words mean nothing. Obama is hope, Obama is change, Obama is our future! - no more than a figment of your imagination.
It pains me to see my friends come to terms with the devil as they pick one of the other remaining candidates now that Edwards has suspended his run. When do people say STOP! enough of this crap?!
There is NO good answer. But, I cannot play any longer. The last seven and a half years of my life has been spent in the Democratic Party fighting against the status quo and for the working person, the middle class, the poor. What I have learned is that when you're up against the status quo - change does not happen. And both of our candidates in the race today are part of the status quo. All you have to do is look at who is endorsing them.
Another thing that totally ticks me off is that it appears, no one is giving consideration as to whether one of these two remaining candidates is capable of winning in a general election! Geeeesh!
For me, I no longer can compromise my values. And that's not an easy stand to take. It's much more difficult for me to say I cannot and will not vote, rather than to hold my nose and vote! but holding one's nose and voting is just continuing the crap!
Perhaps something will come out down the road that could bring Edwards back into the race - my hope. He's left the door open, I think, by suspending his run. Suspending is not the same as withdrawing. All I can do is hope. (Durn, there's that dang hope word again).
If nothing happens where he can come back in, it will be an extremely sad time for me, for most of you, and for our country; as change cannot happen with the same old status quo attitudes. Change calls for a special person who puts people first and corporations interests back where they belong.
I will be voting on Feb 5 and I will be casting my vote for John Edwards! Join me! Let's give John as many delegates as we can - it's the best way to fight back!
"Think - it's not illegal yet."
Monday, January 28, 2008
Today, as those of you responsible citizens already know, is a critical vote on the FISA bill...and please, if you need an explanation of that at this point, do yourself a favor and stop reading right here because you're not going to find it. You should already KNOW. In any event, because we have a Senate full of DINOS - "Democrats In Name Only," it is our job as citizens to make sure we watch these nimble- footed folks whose feet so artfully slide across the aisle where they join their "friends" from bushCo in continuing the destruction of our democracy.
Given that Senator Lieberman's shoes have been known to be EXTRA- specially treated with snake oil, I thought it might be a good day to check up on his activities - already knowing of course that CT's business has been on the back burner while our good Senator Lieberman performs a different kind of soft-shoe for "Maverick" McCain.
It must be said, in fairness and truth, that Senator Lieberman, despite our MANY differences, does know how to pick respectful and professional staff. Hat's off to them for putting up with callers such as lil' ol' me. It CAN'T be easy.
Believe it or not, I'm gonna give Senator Joe a break here. Or, let's call it the benefit of the doubt perhaps.
And that is because I'm unable to rail against him, one of my favorite past-times as most of my readers know, simply because I could find no information about how he intends to vote!!! Imagine that!
I did learn, after much angst on the other side of the call to his D.C office, that indeed, Mr. Lieberman IS intending to appear on the Senator floor to vote on the FISA legislation today. When? Well, that's anyone's guess.
I did learn that there's a possibility of a press release that might give us a glimpse as to which side of the aisle Senator Lieberman's shoes will wind up today. However, I was assured that content of said release, remains unknown at this time. Well, hey, that's ok - it's only near 2 p.m. here on the East Coast - why should we EXPECT anyone to have a position on the violation of our rights at this hour?
So, I'm cutting you a break here, Senator Lieberman.
I'm going to hope that in good faith, that you are going to do the right thing and support our "other" senator, Christopher Dodd, in, if need be, filibustering the vote for cloture on this dastardly piece of legislation that you already know is illegal and that you already know is just one more sordid example of how these criminals are attempting to further chip away at our fundamental rights of privacy in the United States of AMERICA!!!
Senator Lieberman? I call upon you to do the right thing.
SAY NO TO IMMUNITY FOR LAWBREAKERS!!!
P.S. And YOU, Senator Obama, are NO John Kennedy. Or Robert Kennedy.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Though I myself will admit to a certain admiration for Mrs. Clinton throughout the years, to the point I even considered her a wonderful mentor for ALL women, she has taken no, not even a centrist turn, but a RIGHT turn over the past several years. Think I'm kiddin'? Then go look at her record. Look at her votes. Look at her donors. Look at what she says and doesn't say. (For MY record here, never expect me to do your research for you here...that is YOUR job.) In the face of what this country has been through under the bush regime, you would THINK that intelligent, educated voters would recognize that Hillary Clinton might be the CLOSEST thing to ANY traditional Republican ideologist we've ever seen...and that's fine...IF that's what YOU Democrats want. (sorry, Barack - Hillary was a Republican lover before you were) Just make sure you KNOW what you're voting for and if it's a Democrat you want in office, you better forget Hillary, whose husband was one of the "best Republican presidents we've ever had." - Randi Rhodes. Once upon a time, Hillary -yes. Not here. Not now.
Obama...WHAT are you Democrats THINKING here? Or ARE you? Tell me...WHAT do you know about his contributors? WHAT has he "done" though I keep reading about ALL that is...Oh, he voted against the war is it? Fine. Good. More power to him. But can you tell me why that in the face of that, he has CONTINUED to vote to FUND this war he's against? And don't give me that propaganda about cutting off the troops...won't work here. And while we're on THAT topic - how long did it take Hillary to barely even acquiesce that her vote on the war was a mistake??? That makes me feel realllll good...about BOTH of them. Right out of the starting gate, owning that his OWN vote was a MISTAKE, Edwards bested them both. I like it when my candidate demonstrates accountability and growth.
bush/Clinton/bush/possible Clinton. Ya - that's CHANGE all right. I wonder if Bill and Poppy worked it all out during one of their cozy missions of goodwill...come ON, Dems - can't you put 2 + 2 TOGETHER anymore???
Whose platform IS Obama's anyway? Looking closely at dates, it's clear that he's borrowed quite liberally from both Edwards AND Clinton. Change. Change from WHAT, Mr. Obama? WHAT have YOU got to hang your hat on here? When I DO look at your record, all I see is a mish-mosh of ideas taken from BOTH Hillary's and Edwards' proposals. I'm beginning to wonder if you have an original thought in your head at ALL! But, ya shur SOUND real purty, now. Whitened sepulchres look mighty fine too. (oh, sorry - yes, you'll need your Bible to reference THAT one. Hint: New Testament)
And please...enough re bad Mrs. Clinton's "attacks." You got right down into the mud trough with her. And if you don't like attacks, I HAVE to make the leap that you're ill-prepared for what's coming down the line and that's even BEFORE I mention Karl Rove who is undoubtedly LOVING this divisiveness between the two of you. Unless, of course...ahem...
I've seen some of the best Democratic minds over the past several weeks as they stumble over reasons as to why they want to endorse one over the other, give me SERIOUS pause as to what's happened to them that's causing them to abandon the good judgement, excellent analytical skills, sound reasoning and acute political savvy I expect from my peers. What's UP with that?
Even without the big pockets Hillary AND AND AND Obama are dipping into to finance their campaigns, John Edwards STILL managed to finish significantly above what the pundits told you to believe and that's with OUR money. And, with virtually NO coverage from MSM - remember them? The Corporate Corrupteds you used to rail against? What does that say to you?
It tells me we STILL have people among us unwillingly to follow the crowd; unwilling to sell out our values previously held simply to jump on a perceived winning bandwagon. It tells me that we have a FIGHTER here - and if he's "angry?" Well SO WHAT???? I'm ANGRY too...and if you were TRULY informed, YOU'D be angry as well. But for the life of me, it appears that MSM has been able to deter you from your original commitment to truth-seeking and making good, informed judgements.
Neither Hillary or Obama can win the general election. Go check the polls. But evidently, something's preventing you from grasping that when it is CRYSTAL clear that Edwards is the CLEANEST one we've got, the ONLY one putting his neck out there for US - the same "us" who used to believe in the values of the party of the working man. To support either one of them is to throw your vote away given what our old friends in the party of Rove have awaiting us. It's as simple as that.
I have to wonder...is it bushworld side effects that are causing you to lose your way? Or, perhaps, and maybe even worse, could it be that the "sheeple" have been alive and well all along right here in our own backyard?
John Edwards is the ONLY one speaking against the things that are reallyyyyyy hurting you in your own lives whether you realize that or not. While Obama and Billary continue their scrapping in the schoolyard, it would serve you well to pay attention to the "only adult" on the playing field. Why, Dems, why do you continue to work against your own best interests to borrow again from Randi Rhodes?
And WHY are you letting the Mainstream Media choose America's president anyway? Didn't you all get this memo in 2000? Tell me - believe me, I'm listening here. I really want to know. Because what I'm seeing simply makes no sense to me assuming we all have access to the same information.
What IS it you don't understand? Those of us "patriots" who support Edwards will be more than happy to walk you through your illusions.
"There is nothing worse than gangrene of the soul." Mike Malloy 1/20/05
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." Martin Luther King
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Undoubtedly, as voters attempt to make up their own minds, the "Vulfs," the "Tweetys" and the "Pumpkinheads" aka "talking heads," will be drooling all over our airwaves, "catapulting the propaganda" they wish/NEED them to believe in order to prevent John Edwards from becoming the next President of the United States.
Why you might ask? Books have been written on this entire subject but if you don't know why, I suggest you educate yourselves on the media conglomerate, who owns our networks AND where their money not only comes from but goes to. We'll save that chat for another day but for the moment, I'm simply indulging in my morning cynicism AFTER slamming the television off...a.g.a.i.n. The LAST person corporations, Big Pharma and media wish to see in office is Edwards - why? Because he is the ONLY one who is unafraid to stand up to these monolithic, greed-driven monsters. No one owns John Edwards.
But, in the unlikely event any South Carolina voters just happen to be visiting here, I'm giving you what might be one of the most important issues where Senator Edwards again leaves his two media opponents in the wind, directly from his own mouth, directly from his website, http://www.johnedwards.com/:
Senator Edwards sent the following email to supporters this afternoon.
When it comes to protecting the rule of law, words are not enough. We need action.
It's wrong for your government to spy on you.
That's why I'm asking you to join me today in calling on Senate Democrats to
filibuster revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that
would give "retroactive immunity" to the giant telecom companies for their role
in aiding George W. Bush's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens.
The Senate is debating this issue right now -- which is why we must act right now. You can find your Senators' phone numbers here or call the Senate Switchboard at
Granting retroactive immunity is wrong. It will let corporate law-breakers off the hook. It will hamstring efforts to learn the truth about Bush's illegal spying program. And it will flip on its head a core principle that has guided our nation since our founding: the belief that no one, no matter how well connected or what office they hold, is above the law.
But in Washington today, the telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press for
retroactive immunity. George Bush and Dick Cheney are doing everything in their
power to ensure it passes. And too many Senate Democrats are ready to give the
lobbyists and the Bush administration exactly what they want.
Please join me in calling on every Senate Democrat to do everything in their power -- including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation -- to stop
retroactive immunity and stand up for the rule of law. The Constitution should
not be for sale at any price.
Thank you for taking action.
January 24, 2008
"There is nothing worse than gangrene of the soul." Mike Malloy - 1/20/2005
Friday, January 25, 2008
And sometimes, things we say in mild jest have a horrible way of returning to us in the form of a frightening, maddening reality. Know what I'm sayin'?
Moments like that are often marked by a visceral reaction...Upon realization that you may have thought or spoken of something you truly can't bear to consider in the conscious part of your brain and, hoping that maybe the very utterance of it will prevent a sick, cosmic jinx from occurring, you file it away and wish that for a time, you've staved off the monstrous, blood-curdling thought. It might be a one-time deal, or, it might be a recurring thought process this thinking of the "unthinkable." Nevertheless, when it washes or "re-washes" over you, your body sends out a red alert in the form of grisly, ice-cold fingers dancing up your spine or an entire colony of butterflies with squatters' rights laying claim to your stomach. Oh, I think you all probably know this experience - and probably wish you didn't.
As I wish right now.
Just a quick stroll through my archives here, titles alone, will acquaint new readers with my never-ending disgust, disdain and downright loathing toward CT's very own Senator Joseph I.(diot) LIE-berman - now known by self appointment as an"Independent Democrat." My psyche simply won't accommodate a review of the multitude of reasons for my scorn - call it a protective device - and, I'd like to hold on to the little bit of sanity that DOES remain having lived in bushworld for 7+ long, SO VERY long years now. At times when I've really thought that things couldn't possibly get worse, I've always had Holy Joe around to remind me that indeed, they can. And they did. And, if I just hadn't thought one of those thoughts that SHOULD have just perished, maybe I wouldn't have to raise this alarm again.
I said it in wry jest at the time - months ago. Folks laughed. Hey, so did I!
But, I'm not laughing now. Especially since I've seen the same spectral thought just beginning to float around other blogs.
McCain. Lieberman. McCain. Lieberman. McCain. Lieberman...come on..say it with me now....McCain. Lieberman. McCain. Lieberman..anything coming to mind yet?
For those of you not already sickened enough by the thought of Pillsbury Doughboy McCain's peculiar, to say the least, embracing of The Decider on stage following a most brutal and vicious attack/smear/whisper campaign on his family engineered by "bush's Brain" the LAST time 70 year old McCain tried to work out his pathology on the American people, FOREVER nullifying McCain supporters' claim that he's a man of "honor," try on the visual of Lieberman standing by his side as he announces his running mate.
Sorry. I should have warned you. Does the thought disgust and repulse you the way it does me? And that's WITHOUT considering the ramifications of it all. We're simply talking "thought" here.
Some days, it just doesn't pay to get out of bed. Can someone throw me a blankie please?
"There is nothing worse than gangrene of the soul."Mike Malloy 1/20/05
Thursday, January 24, 2008
*cut and pasted from Salon. com with full credit to author and institution.
Barack Obama: "Committed Christian -- Called to Bring Change"
Are there differences between Mike Huckabee's and Barack Obama's overt political appeals as Christians?
Jan. 21, 2008 (updated below - Update II)
Mike Huckabee has been widely criticized for his overt religious appeals to win votes. One of the most criticized aspects of his campaign was a television ad he ran in Iowa and South Carolina pointedly describing himself as a "Christian leader":
Today, Greg Sargent posted a brochure which the Obama campaign is distributing in South Carolina which seem to include religious appeals at least as overt and explicit as anything Huckabee has done. The center page of the brochure proclaims -- in the largest letters on the page -- that Obama is a "COMMITTED CHRISTIAN," and includes three pictures of Obama, all of which show him praying or preaching in a Church, and also includes a fourth picture: of the interior of a Church with a large cross lurking in the background. The page also says that Obama is "guided by his Christian faith" and quotes Obama saying: "We do what we do because God is with us."
That same page prints Obama's views "on the power of prayer," and -- using the same language George Bush has frequently used as a signifier to evangelical voters -- says that Obama is "Called to Christ," "Called to Bring Change" and "Called to Serve":
Similarly, the front page of the brochure shows Obama in a chin-on-hand contemplative posture and underneath, it reads: "Answering the Call." The last page shows two more pictures of Obama in Church, proclaims him again in large letters to be a "COMMITTED CHRISTIAN," and describes how he "felt a beckoning and accepted Jesus Christ into [his] life":
Sargent speculates that the brochure is an attempt to counter the false whispering campaign increasingly being circulated in South Carolina (by whom, we should find out) that Obama is a Muslim. That very well may be, but the brochure seems designed with a far broader purpose: namely, to signify to South Carolina's many Christian voters that Obama is one of them and therefore should have their vote for President, much the way that Huckabee sought to court the evangelical vote that was so critical to the GOP Iowa caucus.
Leave aside whether what Huckabee and/or Obama are doing is inappropriate or not. Given how much religion has been infused into our politics, especially our Republican politics, I didn't really think that anything Huckabee was doing was particularly unusual. It seems more like a mild, natural extension of the direction in which we've been headed for some time. That, for the moment, is not the issue.
Clearly, there are major differences between Huckabee's views on the role of religion in government and Obama's, as evidenced most recently by Huckabee's call for the Constitution to be amended to comport with God's will on abortion and homosexuality. Obama has no such positions (and I agree with both Pam Spaulding and Andrew Sullivan that Obama's speech yesterday at Ebenezer Baptist Church was courageous and, in several important respects, admirable in the extreme).
But in terms of the propriety of their religious appeals for votes, is there really any meaningful difference between the two campaigns? Is it possible to criticize Huckabee for inappropriately exploiting his status in Iowa as a "Christian leader" -- as many, many people did -- while believing that Obama's hailing of himself in South Carolina as a "Committed Christian" is perfectly fine? What's the difference?
UPDATE: For all those angrily objecting to the notion that Huckabee and Obama are the same: nobody is arguing that they are. At least I'm not arguing that, as I think I made quite clear.
Instead, I'm focusing solely on Huckabee's explicit religious appeal for votes, which conveys this message: "Like you, I'm a Christian; my Christianity is central to who I am and how I will lead; and therefore, as a devout Christian, you should vote for me for President." Huckabee was criticized extensively for that appeal. Does anyone doubt that this same message is at least part of the brochure which the Obama campaign is circulating in South Carolina? Regardless of the numerous, significant differences between them, how can one be criticized while the other be defended for employing what seems to be the same tactic?
UPDATE II: Hordes of Obama supporters are claiming in comments and elsewhere that this brochure was nothing more than a perfectly innocent attempt to counter the whispering campaign that Obama is a Muslim. As I indicated, I think that probably is one of the purposes, although there would seem to be lots of other ways to do that other than by creating something this overt. If Obama supporters are really intent on denying that part of the purpose here is to appeal to Christain voters by emphasizing Obama's "COMMITTED CHRISTIANITY," I suppose there is no way to persuade anyone otherwise.
But I do think this question should be answered: the "Obama-is-a-Muslim" whispering campaign has been around for a long, long time -- more than a year ago, it made national headlines. If the primary purpose of this flier -- as Obama supporters insist -- was simply to rebut that false claim, why didn't Obama distribute this Christian brochure to Democrats in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada? Why is it only the heavily Christian South Carolina Democrats who received it? Didn't he want to rebut the Muslim claims in other states besides South Carolina?
Finally, just to underscore the point (again), I'm not arguing that Obama has done anything wrong here. As I said, I thought much of the criticism of Huckabee for making overt religious appeals was overblown because that's become the norm for our political culture. My point is simply that, with regard to this specific tactic of appealing to voters based on shared religious beliefs, Huckabee and Obama seem to be engaged in more or less the same exercise, and therefore, it's irrational to criticize one while defending the other. Atrios makes the same point in a slightly different way.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Alleged slumlord and indicted businessman Antoin 'Tony' Rezko has long supported
the Democratic presidential hopeful, who has returned related donations.
By Dan Morain and Tom Hamburger
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
January 23 2008
CHICAGO — Hillary Rodham Clinton dropped the name of Barack Obama's
Chicago patron into the South Carolina debate Monday night, putting front and
center a tangled relationship that has the potential to undermine Obama's image
as a candidate whose ethical standards are distinctly higher than those of his
The complete article can be viewed at:
Visit latimes.com at http://www.latimes.com
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Keep sluggin' it out, Hillary and Barack. Let's see if we can figure out which one of you is blacker, ok? Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to fight for Senator Edwards - the only one AMONG you who DOES carry the legacy of OUR hero, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
The Honorable John R. Edwards
410 Market Street
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Dear Senator Edwards:
It was good meeting with you yesterday and discussing my father's legacy. On the day when the nation will honor my father, I wanted to follow up with a personal note.
There has been, and will continue to be, a lot of back and forth in the political arena over my father's legacy. It is a commentary on the breadth and depth of his impact that so many people want to claim his legacy. I am concerned that we do not blur the lines and obscure the truth about what he stood for: speaking up for justice for those who have no voice.I appreciate that on the major issues of health care, the environment, and the economy, you have framed the issues for what they are - a struggle for justice. And, you have almost single-handedly made poverty an issue in this election. You know as well as anyone that the 37 million people living in poverty have no voice in our system. They don't have lobbyists in Washington and they don't get to go to lunch with members of Congress. Speaking up for them is not politically convenient.
But, it is the right thing to do.
I am disturbed by how little attention the topic of economic justice has received during this campaign. I want to challenge all candidates to follow your lead, and speak up loudly and forcefully on the issue of economic justice in America.From our conversation yesterday, I know this is personal for you. I know you know what it means to come from nothing. I know you know what it means to get the opportunities you need to build a better life. And, I know you know that injustice is alive and well in America, because millions of people will never get the same opportunities you had.
I believe that now, more than ever, we need a leader who wakes up every morning with the knowledge of that injustice in the forefront of their minds, and who knows that when we commit ourselves to a cau se as a nation, we can make major strides in our own lifetimes.
My father was not driven by an illusory vision of a perfect society. He was driven by the certain knowledge that when people of good faith and strong principles commit to making things better, we can change hearts, we can change minds, and we can change lives.
So, I urge you: keep going. Ignore the pundits, who think this is a horserace, not a fight for justice. My dad was a fighter. As a friend and a believer in my father's words that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, I say to you: keep going. Keep fighting.
My father would be proud.
Martin Luther King III
Friday, January 18, 2008
After it became crystal clear to me that your candidacy, regardless of your so-called "visionary speeches," lacks substance, leadership, originality and a concrete plan I could sink my teeth into, a picture of such transparency emerged that I'd speculate that even typical, uninformed Americans (hopefully awakening) could recognize your platform as a classic smoke screens 'n mirrors act. IF paying attention. And, I'm being nice.
I've been watching you comport yourself quite keenly. Those of us, who take our responsibility of choosing our leaders carefully, often do. You came bounding out onto the stage in Boston, MA, at the Democratic National Convention, handsome, open, a sight for our sore eyes. And there you were; full of promise, for All of us. Who could NOT have been moved and inspired by your motivational message that promised us a light in the darkness, and hope vs. despair? I liked you. A lot. Then.
Oh, don't get me wrong. I still do like you. I'd like ANY of our talented Democrats over ANY Republican ANY day of the week. But, here are a few things I DON'T like.
I don't like the naivete you demonstrate when you think that political correctness trumps the realities we face ahead in going head to toe with filthy, smarmy, lying "swiftboaters" who are already gunning their engines waiting to "attack" you or ANY Democratic candidate without mercy until they're SURE that they've got MSM aboard for the ride. Do you REALLY think that they might give you a pass - perhaps because they're too worried about the ramifications of dragging race into their hulls maybe? Take a look around you, Senator. They already have. And while I'm on the topic - does the name Karl Rove mean anything to you? I'd bet it does. But maybe not for the same reason I cite him here. Assuming you are NOT a manifestation and result of one of his ever-reaching, never-ending talons, I'd suggest you have one of your staffers give you a quick update on the author of the "New and Revised Classic Dirty Tricksters 101." Aka: 'bush's Brain.' Might serve you well.
I don't like that through careful research and comparison of candidate records, I've discovered that there again, your plan is void of concreteness, unlike Senator Edwards' illuminates and details. In fact, MUCH of what you speak to is not only AFTER the fact, but is taken directly from Edwards' playbook. Come on, Senator Obama. We're not stupid here! We can read. We can tell time. We can compare voting records, research money trails and distinguish one from the other. Really, we can.
And we do.
I find nothing terribly focused on your webpages, nor, in your spoken words. Oh, sure, I find lots of Mr. Nice-Guy talk which is lovely indeed. In fact, if I were like many other Amurkins right now, I'd be supporting you simply because I might "enjoy a beer with you." Or tea. But, I'm not.
Or, if I were like many other Americans, I might decide to back or NOT back you based on race, color, gender or creed. But, you see, Senator Obama, when I'm deciding who it is I will support to be the President of the United States (not to be confused with the current Supreme Court appointed squatter in our White House), I'm looking to find one who will talk the tough talk, walk the straight walk DIRECTLY to the problems we face. And oh, yes, one more thing...I DO want someone who is organized - certainly not the portrait you painted for us at the last debate per your own words. Visions of you appearing on Inauguration Day with "post-it notes" stuck all over your new Brooks Brothers' suit frightened me more than most of your attempts to show us who you really are. If you can't prioritize CRITICALLY, IMMEDIATELY, demonstrating EXCELLENT command of all factors necessary for successful decision making and leadership, well, I'm sorry - you're simply not the man, woman, black, white, gay, lesbian, Christian, atheist, or WHATEVER for me.
But you know what REALLY gassed me, Senator?
What, Senator Obama, what in Planet Earth's name were you thinking????
Or, let me rephrase that....WERE you thinking when you cited him as an agent of change yesterday? Do you know your HISTORY???
And no, your attempt at spin did not work with me. Sorry. It just didn't.
Wanna know my GREATEST concern, Senator Obama? Something very deep inside me, call it intuition if you will, tells me that you are not who you say you are.
In fact, Barack Obama, WHO are you?
Hmmmmmm. I wonder.
"There is nothing worse than gangrene of the soul."Mike Malloy 1/20/05
Friday, January 11, 2008
The following, a letter just sent to him, represents my utter disgust. Trust me - I'll have more to say later.
Mr. Lamont -
I'd met you at your original campaign meeting in New Haven in a school cafeteria - then, when John Edwards, WHO CAME TO SUPPORT YOU, at Yale.
I view your endorsement of Obama to be the EPITOME of poor judgement and hypocrisy of the highest order.
I worked VERY hard for you, gave you $$, made countless calls, blog entries, etc. because I believed in you. This action of yours makes NO political or professional sense to me.
Thus, I want you to know that not only have you lost my support in any of your future political endeavors, but that of ALL those whom are influenced by my voice.
Clearly, something is very "rotten in Denmark" here. It's also clear you're not how you presented yourself.
I guess, Mr. Lamont, that in the end, corporate money DOES rule you.
Monday, January 07, 2008
This is what I want in my president. Not a faithful napper and one who's in bed while most Americans are just getting home from work. How 'bout you?
"While everyone else goes to bed tonight," he told a Nashua audience, "I'm going to be out working."
THAT is what I want in a President. A FIGHTER. A HARD worker. Someone who will fight and work for ME and not Halliburton or Novartis - or whoever gave them the most money to get them elected.
"Democrat John Edwards, meanwhile, mounted an all-night bus tour of the state, with early morning stops planned for Berlin, Littleton and Claremont, with 10 more events throughout the day and evening. "While everyone else goes to bed tonight," he told a Nashua audience, "I'm going to be out working. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_po/campaign_rdp_...
379 days left till Inauguration Day
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Edwards: "We have a battle in front of us. We do."
From last night's debate: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/us/politics/05text-dd...
I want to say just -- I want to say a quick word about this. You know, it is true that these entrenched interests -- whether you're talking about oil companies, drug companies, gas companies, whoever -- these entrenched interests are literally stealing our children's future. They have a stranglehold on this democracy and they are having an incredibly destructive force on the middle class, on families being able to do what my family has done and so many who are sitting here have been able to do. And the problem is you can't be with those people, take their money and then challenge them. It doesn't work.
You have to be willing to actually stand up and say no -- no to lobbyist money, no to PAC money, no corporate lobbyists working for me in the White House.
If you intend to take them on, and if it is personal for you -- and this is extraordinarily personal for me -- if it's personal for you, then you can be successful bringing about the change.Teddy Roosevelt -- just one quick example -- Teddy Roosevelt -- Teddy Roosevelt, a great American president -- he didn't make deals with the monopolies and the trusts. Teddy Roosevelt took them on, busted the monopolies, busted the trusts. That's what it's going to take.
We have a battle in front of us. We do. I don't think we have a problem with politicians in Washington spending enough time with lobbyists and going to cocktail parties. They do it all the time. They do it every single day, and I'll tell you who's paying the price for those cocktail parties: Natalie Sarkisian, every single American who doesn't have health care coverage, everybody who's going to the gas pump and paying so much money for their gas. When are we going to have a president who actually takes these people on? That's what I'm going to do.
I actually completely agree that it's the responsibility of the president to unite and galvanize the American people. It is also the responsibility of the president -- and I will do it -- to work with members of Congress to get things done. But these entrenched, moneyed interests that have a stranglehold on the middle class, that are doing -- incredibly destructive to American jobs and health care system, energy, all taxes, trade, they're in everything. Absolutely everything. You cannot nice these people to death. It doesn't work. I have been in the trenches fighting them for my whole adult life.And it takes strength, backbone, fight, and you have to take them on.
Transcript: Democratic Debate in New Hampshire, January 5, 2008http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/us/politics/05text-dd...
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Will follow as soon as I can find the time with a blog to describe my personal discussion with him on New Year's Eve from Iowa facilitated by a dear friend. I'd already met him in person and I can assure you that both personally and professionally, it is my FERVENT belief that he is the only one who can truly make this the "One America" he is dedicating his life to.
More to follow.