Bill Ayers: Terrorist? Seriously?!

Watch this Hardball interview with Bill Ayers, and THEN you can tell me that he is a terrorist.

I Saw and Talked to Biden: Here's Proof!

Yes, that is me with Senator Joe Biden, candidate for VP of the United States.  Very cool moment!  

Shortly after I had him take the picture with me (this is in Newark, Ohio btw) he said to another person who wanted a pic: "Tell this guy to take it."--referring to me.  

As I was taking the picture, I knew I had to ask a question... I had prepared an in depth and broad question to ask if given the opportunity with a microphone.  Unfortunately, it wasn't that kind of town hall meeting, so in the midst of the bustling crowd of Democrats, I spontaneously said: "Joe!  Please tell me you're gonna end American Imperialism!"

He answered: "Well, I don't think we're imperialist, but we will get out of Iraq."  

Okay, decent answer, but I regretted how I phrased the question.  I should have asked: "Joe, please tell me you're gonna end American militarism."  Because a.) Imperialism is too loaded of a word and debatable, and b.) militarism directly refers to the military-industrial complex, which is more of a tangible phenomenon (the one that Eisenhower talked about).  

But I was satisfied enough.

Cynicism for Obamanation

The Obama fervor is fairly strong here on campus, so I thought I should inject a little realism into the conversation by posting the following in our school paper (you may recognize the quote):

Former New York Times reporter recently wrote this forward thinking and realistic assessment of our current political predicament:

"I place no hope in Obama or the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is a pathetic example of liberal, bourgeois impotence, hypocrisy and complacency. It has been bought off. I will vote, if only as a form of protest against our corporate state and an homage to Polanyi's brilliance, for Ralph Nader. I would like to offer hope, but it is more important to be a realist. No ethic or act of resistance is worth anything if it is not based on the real. And the real, I am afraid, does not look good."

I am voting for Barack Obama, but I know that I should be voting for Nader. I suppose it is the fluffy hope that Obama speaks of in his carefully crafted speeches... the idea that Obama could be a third party in disguise. If the fact that Nader is on 45 state ballots and was STILL restricted from the debates does not set off red flags in your mind, you must be truly blinded. But if there is not radical reform of our government, then this country is going to become a lot more pathetic... maybe even dangerous. The corruption has permeated all aspects of the legislative, executive and judicial. The empire is out of control.

Eventually there will be a call to arms to end the corporatocracy and dismantle the military industrial complex (look it up)... to restore the integrity of the Republic. The people forgot Vietnam and did not feel the Iraq War, but they will feel the next one, and when they start to suffer, they will cry out for another Ralph Nader, Mike Gravel, or Ron Paul. Till then and beyond we must take after the Founding Fathers and be skeptical of those who rule, and take action when they become incompetent.

Later today I'll be seeing Joe Biden speak in Newark, OH... hopefully I'll get to ask him a good question.  Will report later.

Intellectual Elitism is Bad?

Since when did being an "intellectual" become such a negative aspect of our leaders? When I have surgery done, I want the best and the brightest--not just some guy or gal who is likable.  The same should go for running the country, right?  But John Kerry was lambasted for being too much of a "liberal" intellectual, and the cowboy ended up winning that one. In David Brooks' NYT Op-ed, he explains that:

The Republicans have alienated whole professions.  Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it’s 2-to-1. With tech executives, it’s 5-to-1. With investment bankers, it’s 2-to-1. It took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community.

Yes, the smart people are now with the Democrats, but only because the Republican party alienated their intellectuals.  Republicans have sought out to capture the "average Joe" voter by nominating very "average" people.  Social-conservatism is not progressive or forward thinking, but it is what many people cling to.  Obama was correct when he saidthat people turn to "guns and religion" largely due to economic woes--after all, religion is the "opiate of the masses."  But Obama was slammed for the remark, and was portrayed as someone who worships his own superiority and wisdom, and looks down on the common man.

It's really too bad that intellectualism has been given the cold shoulder because there are many brilliant conservatives--I know some myself.  But they have been abandoned by their base, and now grudgingly trot along behind their mediocre ticket.  

If you look back

 at some of the greatest American statesmen, you will find that they were men who were well informed, well educated, and well versed in literature.  They were philosophers and visionaries.  From the Founding Fathers to Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR.  They were masters of policy and diplomacy.  Their wisdom celebrated the dynamism of knowledge, and was their source of strength.  

Now we have Sarah Palin. 

What Palin Proved

Tonight I had the pleasure of having dinner with Norman Ornstein, an esteemed fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (a conservative think-tank in Washington). His conversation at dinner was interesting, and he provided some good insight on my questions for him, but I'd like to talk a little bit about what he had to say about the first presidential debate, and what he had to say after watching the VP debate tonight (after his lecture with another Political Scientist named Thomas Mann, he watched the debate with us).

He explained that the pundits got it all wrong in their analysis of the first debate. The media's narrative was about who won the most 'debate points.' Many argued that John McCain was a stronger debater, particularly on foreign policy, but that Obama held his own. Ornstein explained that the debate wasn't about John McCain at all in fact. It was all about Obama proving to voters that he could be presidential, and he succeeded. No one doubted John McCain's knowledge on the issues, or even his experience. But Obama had to provide the image that he could be the man to lead the country.

In that respect, Obama won the debate.

Tonight, however, the tables were turned as all eyes turned to Sarah Palin--the great big question mark of this campaign. What Palin had to prove tonight had nothing to do with her in actuality. It had to do with John McCain and his judgment. Did McCain take a reckless risk in choosing the governor? In this respect, John McCain won because Palin held her ground, and even when she was clearly dodging the question, did it with a certain grace. The point is that Palin didn't screw up. She didn't give us that moment we had all been waiting for. Tonight Palin strongly defended John McCain's judgement (by performing well), and certainly provided much relief for the campaign.

However, both Mann and Ornstein projected a handy Obama victory unless something catastrophic happened. There are only 32 days left until the election, but something could easily happen in that amount of time.

With all that said, I'll just point out that the real winners of these debates are the military-industrialists and militarism, nuclear power, corporate crime and the bailout. The losers?

Not Ready

By this point it should be quite clear to voters that Sarah Palin is severely out of touch with the issues. Her record of fighting the pork-barrel spending of Congress has been grossly exaggerated, her statements regarding the War on Terror suggest that she simply does not understand what is going on in the world, and the fact that she had no idea of what the Bush Doctrine is proves it.

Sarah Palin did take on the Republican machine in Alaska, which is certainly commendable, but we should be more cautious when it comes to deciding the person who could very well be in control of the country's nuclear launch codes. Have you heard some of the things this lady has said? That the war in Iraq is a "task that is from God" ... "that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan." Umm... that's some scary stuff.



Here is a fundamentalist Christian who believes that by fighting 'terrorists' in Iraq, we are serving the will of a supreme being... and she is seriously a candidate for the second most powerful job in the world? What will happen if President McCain dies in office? What course will she take if we are attacked again on her watch? A person so out of touch and with such radical views has no place in our government... I thought we had learned our lesson!

UPDATE: The McCain people believe that women will vote for gender; that they will turn their backs on values just to get a woman in the White House. I think McCain is in for a big surprise from the gals of the USA come Nov. 4. Hopefully.

You Can't Stop a Movement

I'll be honest, when I heard that John McCain had chosen a woman as his VP nominee, I thought the Obama campaign might be slipping--that the aura surrounding the black nominee would soon be overshadowed by the woman from Alaska.  Will Sarah Palin be able to give the McCain campaign the overhaul it needs to change the face of the general election?  I don't think so.

Palin is an excellent choice, actually.  She will without a doubt in my mind help John McCain; but in Politico's words: "Let's stop pretending this race is as close as national polling suggests."  McCain is trying to defeat a movement, and unless something catastrophic happens to the Obama camp, he won't.  

Pretty soon, the idea that we could have a hockey-mom VP will fade (many believed we'd have a woman as President... and VP isn't as important), and people will remember what they saw in Obama: a new direction.  Whether or not Obama will be the leader this country needs is irrelevant.  The fact is that he inspires people.  He makes you think that things can be better (and they can); that our country can reach for the stars once

again, and that we can be proud of our country without remorse. People don't want the politics of fear--they want to dream, and live the dream.  Perhaps Barack Obama is a fantasy.  Maybe he is an inevitable disappointment.  But it is Obama's politics of hope that make him something John McCain can never be.