On April 15, 2009 it will be 144 years since the assasination of President Abraham Lincoln. It was a Good Friday.
Lincoln is remembered most, for successfully leading his country through its greatest internal crisis - the civil war. By defeating the Southern States, which wanted to expand the institution of slavery, and uniting his country, he has firmly entrenched himself deep in the psyche of all Americans as one of its greatest Presidents.
Today as America is once more faced with another great crisis, it has turned to a new President with a vision for 'change'. President-elect Obama makes no bones about his deep admiration for Lincoln. And the media pundits haven't failed to point out the many similarities between them both. They are from the same state - Illinois; they are both lawyers who rose from relative obscurity to attain the highest office in the land; they are both 6' 4" and very athletic. But for me his most important role is that he embodies the fulfillment of Lincoln's dream: with his African father and his white mother.
Lincoln's aim was always the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of the African slaves. However in order to gain the support to accomplish this, he was always careful to couch his language and state his agenda as the "preservation of the Union". As Frederick Douglass, that great Afro-American is reported as saying of Lincoln: "he was the first great man I talked to in the united States who in no single instance reminded me of the difference between himself and myself, or the difference of colour."
Obama is a master at oratory. As he says he carefully "calibrates" every word he says. In this he has proven himself to be an extremely disciplined person. Some are looking for any and every signal that he will reverse himself on his campaign promises.
In the meantime, White America (a minority) fueled by the paranoia of the right-wing talk radio shows, have been busy buying assault weapons. While others are anxiously trying to subvert any signs of the promised "change" - even before Obama gets started.
But as Lincoln once said "I shall adopt new views so fast they shall appear to be true views."
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Here Comes The Circus
It is the oldest trick in the political book: in times of crisis, create a diversion. The Romans may not have invented this one, but it was certainly made famous by the Emperor Nero. It is said that while the Roman Empire crumbled, he gave the people circuses hoping no doubt to ‘turn the page’ on the current crisis.
Every day John McSame and the Republicans conjure up a new circus: the current one, twice as ridiculous as the last. This week it is “Joe The Plumber”; the week before it was William Ayers. Sometimes there are even two circuses at once: witness Palin digging up ‘old washed- up terrorists’ and Joe Six- Pack and juggling both at the same time.
To keep on offering the same millennia old politics, one has to have complete disdain for the people. The Republicans must think everyone is stupid. Was it King Louis of France, who during the revolution, when his suffering subjects asked for bread, disdainfully declared “Give them cake to eat!”? Well we know what became of him.
While the people of the US are asking for answers about what is happening to their retirement funds, their jobs, their loss of financial security the best that John McCain and Gov. Palin can offer is the same old, tired, reactionary rhetoric of the 1950’s. “Socialism” is what Senator Obama is trying to force on the country – like that which exists in Canada and Europe - they trumpet from the political podium.
The whole world must be laughing at that one. Well I guess no circus is complete without the clowns. I can’t wait for the American electorate to “turn the page” on this Republican Circus.
Every day John McSame and the Republicans conjure up a new circus: the current one, twice as ridiculous as the last. This week it is “Joe The Plumber”; the week before it was William Ayers. Sometimes there are even two circuses at once: witness Palin digging up ‘old washed- up terrorists’ and Joe Six- Pack and juggling both at the same time.
To keep on offering the same millennia old politics, one has to have complete disdain for the people. The Republicans must think everyone is stupid. Was it King Louis of France, who during the revolution, when his suffering subjects asked for bread, disdainfully declared “Give them cake to eat!”? Well we know what became of him.
While the people of the US are asking for answers about what is happening to their retirement funds, their jobs, their loss of financial security the best that John McCain and Gov. Palin can offer is the same old, tired, reactionary rhetoric of the 1950’s. “Socialism” is what Senator Obama is trying to force on the country – like that which exists in Canada and Europe - they trumpet from the political podium.
The whole world must be laughing at that one. Well I guess no circus is complete without the clowns. I can’t wait for the American electorate to “turn the page” on this Republican Circus.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Into Africa
Recently President Bill Clinton made one of the most profound statements I have heard from a political statesman in a long time. He said: “I wish the media – for about 18 months – would stop referring to Africa as if it were one country. There are 48 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, and most of them are doing reasonably well. But all the news is about the wars, famines, and health epidemics that are taking place in a few states. And when these are reported it is said to be happening in 'Africa' as if the continent was one country.”
There seems to be a concerted effort to portray Africa and peoples of African descent as in some way inferior to other races: unable to solve their own problems; dependent on handouts from the rest of the world. I guess it is one way for the former European powers and their descendants to cleanse themselves of the collective guilt for the absolute rape of the resources and people that took place for over 300 hundred years and continues to this day.
To be fair, present day exploitation is due to a great extent to bad governance and unbridled greed by those who have seized leadership positions. But it is also due to vestiges of the colonial system of ‘divide and rule’, where states were created through bringing natural enemies together without regard for geography, ancestry and culture: as happened with the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda.
It is generally accepted by the evolutionists, that human life originated in Africa –most likely East Africa. This is posing a dilemma for the racial supremacists – white and yellow: but mostly the whites. But the most convincing evidence that the black race was first, is the genome evidence. Over 97% of the genes in all mankind can be traced to people from Southern Africa. (It would appear the Adam looked something like – Nelson Mandela!)
The young have seen that all this nonsense about racial superiority is without foundation. They have seen that whenever black peolple have been given even a half-level playing field, they have grasped it and excelled. (No wonder they are supporting the Obama candidacy with such vigour.)
But the transformation in racial consciousness didn’t start with Obama. Sports and music have played the most important role in causing this paradigm shift – from Jesse Owens to the Williams sisters to Pele to the 'African' marathon runners, both male and female- people of African descent have proven that – given the opportunity – they are superior or equal to all comers. What the people of the many countries of Africa need are not hand- outs, but opportunity.
Chris Rock may not be the funniest man alive or even the smartest. But for my money he is the smartest comedian on the planet. He said something with which I concur wholeheartedly. “There won’t be true equality in the world until the black man is paid as much as the white man for being mediocre!”
There seems to be a concerted effort to portray Africa and peoples of African descent as in some way inferior to other races: unable to solve their own problems; dependent on handouts from the rest of the world. I guess it is one way for the former European powers and their descendants to cleanse themselves of the collective guilt for the absolute rape of the resources and people that took place for over 300 hundred years and continues to this day.
To be fair, present day exploitation is due to a great extent to bad governance and unbridled greed by those who have seized leadership positions. But it is also due to vestiges of the colonial system of ‘divide and rule’, where states were created through bringing natural enemies together without regard for geography, ancestry and culture: as happened with the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda.
It is generally accepted by the evolutionists, that human life originated in Africa –most likely East Africa. This is posing a dilemma for the racial supremacists – white and yellow: but mostly the whites. But the most convincing evidence that the black race was first, is the genome evidence. Over 97% of the genes in all mankind can be traced to people from Southern Africa. (It would appear the Adam looked something like – Nelson Mandela!)
The young have seen that all this nonsense about racial superiority is without foundation. They have seen that whenever black peolple have been given even a half-level playing field, they have grasped it and excelled. (No wonder they are supporting the Obama candidacy with such vigour.)
But the transformation in racial consciousness didn’t start with Obama. Sports and music have played the most important role in causing this paradigm shift – from Jesse Owens to the Williams sisters to Pele to the 'African' marathon runners, both male and female- people of African descent have proven that – given the opportunity – they are superior or equal to all comers. What the people of the many countries of Africa need are not hand- outs, but opportunity.
Chris Rock may not be the funniest man alive or even the smartest. But for my money he is the smartest comedian on the planet. He said something with which I concur wholeheartedly. “There won’t be true equality in the world until the black man is paid as much as the white man for being mediocre!”
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
When is a win, not a win?
Sarah Palin is the biggest public relations fraud since the Spice Girls. “Never has so much attention been paid by so many to one with such little talent or accomplishments.” (Apologies to Churchill.) Now that her shine has evaporated, she is being ignored more and more by the media and will soon achieve her destiny of irrelevance.
So the media is back to analyzing Obama’s and the Democrats weaknesses and trying to drive a wedge between supporters of the Clinton’s and the rest of the party.
When Obama is leading by six points, the media – CNN et al, report it as an “underperformance”. When he leads by 3 points it is called a “statistical dead heat.” When John McCain leads by 1 point, he is said to have “pulled ahead”. Now that John McCain has slipped to his usual position of 5 points behind Obama, the Republican spin doctors abetted by their friends in the media, are now saying that national polls are meaningless. It’s what's happening in the swing states that count.
Yesterday we had a CNN’s pollster advising the public not to vote early. (I guess the early vote is breaking for Obama.) “Have you never heard about the October surprise?” he chirped. “Wait until then before making up your mind” he continued.
Mark my word. The Republicans are planning to steal this one if they can’t win it fairly. How much of the popular vote does Obama need to win, to really win? If he wins 53% to McCain’s 47% (a six point spread) will that be enough? If the Republicans don’t want to see the country erupt into civil unrest, they better not go ahead with their plans to steal those close races.
Now the strangest interview I have seen in days is the one this morning on CNN with Ralph Nader. The interviewer was attempting to highlight the “Nader factor”. The theory is that with Nader in the race polling 4%, this could be enough to deny Obama victory.
Then Nader said a most curious thing: In Florida where both Obama and McCain are polling 48% each (without the Nader factor), when Nader’s 4% is taken into account, it is McCain who loses 4% and fall to 44%. End of interview. I have not seen such a hurried exit to commercial in a long time.
Talk about the liberal media: well thank God for them, wherever they are. If we didn’t have some balance and choice we would all be fed the poison of Limbaugh, and FoxNews and the “spin” of the Republicans through CNN.
So the media is back to analyzing Obama’s and the Democrats weaknesses and trying to drive a wedge between supporters of the Clinton’s and the rest of the party.
When Obama is leading by six points, the media – CNN et al, report it as an “underperformance”. When he leads by 3 points it is called a “statistical dead heat.” When John McCain leads by 1 point, he is said to have “pulled ahead”. Now that John McCain has slipped to his usual position of 5 points behind Obama, the Republican spin doctors abetted by their friends in the media, are now saying that national polls are meaningless. It’s what's happening in the swing states that count.
Yesterday we had a CNN’s pollster advising the public not to vote early. (I guess the early vote is breaking for Obama.) “Have you never heard about the October surprise?” he chirped. “Wait until then before making up your mind” he continued.
Mark my word. The Republicans are planning to steal this one if they can’t win it fairly. How much of the popular vote does Obama need to win, to really win? If he wins 53% to McCain’s 47% (a six point spread) will that be enough? If the Republicans don’t want to see the country erupt into civil unrest, they better not go ahead with their plans to steal those close races.
Now the strangest interview I have seen in days is the one this morning on CNN with Ralph Nader. The interviewer was attempting to highlight the “Nader factor”. The theory is that with Nader in the race polling 4%, this could be enough to deny Obama victory.
Then Nader said a most curious thing: In Florida where both Obama and McCain are polling 48% each (without the Nader factor), when Nader’s 4% is taken into account, it is McCain who loses 4% and fall to 44%. End of interview. I have not seen such a hurried exit to commercial in a long time.
Talk about the liberal media: well thank God for them, wherever they are. If we didn’t have some balance and choice we would all be fed the poison of Limbaugh, and FoxNews and the “spin” of the Republicans through CNN.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Throw the right, Obama!
Senator Obama infuriates me at times. He is like a boxer with a knock-out right punch who round after round, allows his opponent to rain a barrage of unanswered blows on him, without response. At the democratic convention he came out swinging and the ‘bounce’ in the polls was nine points. The voters, both democratic and independent, loved it. The Republicans were terrified and unsure of themselves. Since Palin’s appointment he has retreated into his usual polite sparing with John McCain and the Republicans.
This is war, my friend. There can be no let up in your attacks on John McCain, between now and election day, if you hope to win. No apologies. Take no prisoners. This is not a scholarly debate with your law faculty colleagues, at the university.
I can understand the approach taken with the Clintons in the primaries, of not burning any bridges. They were needed later to unite the party. But now the sole aim has to be ‘winning’. After victory, Obama can make those changes that will bring about more civility in politics and presidential campaigns.
In any event, Americans like to see their political leaders show some fight. They want to see their leader draw the line in the sand and say to their opponent with steel in their veins and blood in their eyes: “if you cross that line I will punch you in the nose”. That’s what President Kennedy did to the Russians in the Cuban missile crises. That’s what Senator Clinton did during the Ohio-Texas primaries.
Did Senator Obama have to be so superlative in his praise of the ‘surge’? Couldn’t his answer be simply, “yes it was a success”. Did he have to say it was a “spectacular success”? Did he have to be so glowing in his praise of small town mayors? Couldn’t he have just said that they do an important job, but there is a vast leap to move from small town mayor to leader of the largest economy and most powerful military in the world, in 18 months.
Senator Obama has reserved some of his most stinging comments for his own base. After it was revealed that that pillar of Christian and right-wing values, Sarah Palin, had a teenage daughter who was pregnant, the verbal assault by Obama, on those who were questioning Palin’s family values, was scathing. (Just try and imagine what the reaction of Rush Limbaugh and the Republicans would have been like if it was Obama's unmarried teenage daughter that was pregnant.) The fact that his mom had him when she was a teenager is irrelevant. Neither his mom nor grandmother was running for public office, nor did they try to pass themselves off as the embodiment of “American values”.
The Republican talk show pundits have been displaying a sort of cock-sure smugness with regard to the upcoming presidential debates. Some have gone so far as to suggest that that will be the defining moment in the race. Do they know something, like they did at that forum at the Saddleback church? There are no honourable men in politics. The stakes are much too high.
To fall into a Republican trap once, could be considered carelessness. For it to happen a second time would be – well- darn dumb.
This is war, my friend. There can be no let up in your attacks on John McCain, between now and election day, if you hope to win. No apologies. Take no prisoners. This is not a scholarly debate with your law faculty colleagues, at the university.
I can understand the approach taken with the Clintons in the primaries, of not burning any bridges. They were needed later to unite the party. But now the sole aim has to be ‘winning’. After victory, Obama can make those changes that will bring about more civility in politics and presidential campaigns.
In any event, Americans like to see their political leaders show some fight. They want to see their leader draw the line in the sand and say to their opponent with steel in their veins and blood in their eyes: “if you cross that line I will punch you in the nose”. That’s what President Kennedy did to the Russians in the Cuban missile crises. That’s what Senator Clinton did during the Ohio-Texas primaries.
Did Senator Obama have to be so superlative in his praise of the ‘surge’? Couldn’t his answer be simply, “yes it was a success”. Did he have to say it was a “spectacular success”? Did he have to be so glowing in his praise of small town mayors? Couldn’t he have just said that they do an important job, but there is a vast leap to move from small town mayor to leader of the largest economy and most powerful military in the world, in 18 months.
Senator Obama has reserved some of his most stinging comments for his own base. After it was revealed that that pillar of Christian and right-wing values, Sarah Palin, had a teenage daughter who was pregnant, the verbal assault by Obama, on those who were questioning Palin’s family values, was scathing. (Just try and imagine what the reaction of Rush Limbaugh and the Republicans would have been like if it was Obama's unmarried teenage daughter that was pregnant.) The fact that his mom had him when she was a teenager is irrelevant. Neither his mom nor grandmother was running for public office, nor did they try to pass themselves off as the embodiment of “American values”.
The Republican talk show pundits have been displaying a sort of cock-sure smugness with regard to the upcoming presidential debates. Some have gone so far as to suggest that that will be the defining moment in the race. Do they know something, like they did at that forum at the Saddleback church? There are no honourable men in politics. The stakes are much too high.
To fall into a Republican trap once, could be considered carelessness. For it to happen a second time would be – well- darn dumb.
The Politics of Change
Some time during the recent Republican Convention, former mayor Guiliani, in a desperate attempt to justify McCain’s pick of Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate said: “we (the republicans) have it right. We have the older person at the top of the ticket and the younger person at the bottom”. I guess that is what is wrong with the Bush –Cheney administration!
These Republicans will say anything to get elected. What shocks me is their bare-faced lying. For instance: when it was pointed out by the media that Sarah Palin had fully endorsed that so-called “bridge to nowhere” before it became unpopular; and her claims now, that she told Washington “thanks but no thanks” is a little less than the truth, her ‘handlers’ replied that they were not about to change that li(n)e in her speech as ‘it had worked for them’.
The Republicans have consistently used whatever ‘works’; to hell with principles. Their main strategy is to mock or undermine Obama’s strengths. So if he pulls large crowds, they call him a celebrity. If he inspires hope, they say that he has a messianic complex. If his message and vision of change has lit a fire, they say that it is lofty but meaningless rhetoric.
Now that Sarah Palin is drawing large crowds, inspiring the Republican base and promising ‘change’ in Washington, McCain and his advisors have been exposed for what they truly are: what’s the right word? – Obama called them ‘sleazy’; other words like small minded and dishonest come to mind. A 72 year-old man who has spent the last quarter of a century in politics in Washington attempting to pass himself off as an agent of change : that has to rank as one of the greatest political sleight-of-hand in the history of U.S. presidential elections.
But what is almost funny it weren’t so pathetic, is watching McCain follow Palin around the country, like an infatuated school boy. That gave me an idea for an Obama advertisement:
Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin: the scene is a classroom filled with republicans (including McCain) as the pupils. Palin is the teacher. Palin is addressing the class (in that irritating high pitch tone of hers).
Palin: Listen up republicans; Obama’s plan will reduce taxes for those making $50k per year. Right?
Class of Republicans: Right
Palin: The citizens will also pay less taxes if they make $100k per year. Right?
Class of Republicans: Right
Palin: What about those making $150k per year?
Class of Republicans: They will pay less taxes under Obama’s plan than under our plan?
Palin: Very good class. Did you get that John?
John: I don’t get it.
Palin: Oh John you never get it, do you?
These Republicans will say anything to get elected. What shocks me is their bare-faced lying. For instance: when it was pointed out by the media that Sarah Palin had fully endorsed that so-called “bridge to nowhere” before it became unpopular; and her claims now, that she told Washington “thanks but no thanks” is a little less than the truth, her ‘handlers’ replied that they were not about to change that li(n)e in her speech as ‘it had worked for them’.
The Republicans have consistently used whatever ‘works’; to hell with principles. Their main strategy is to mock or undermine Obama’s strengths. So if he pulls large crowds, they call him a celebrity. If he inspires hope, they say that he has a messianic complex. If his message and vision of change has lit a fire, they say that it is lofty but meaningless rhetoric.
Now that Sarah Palin is drawing large crowds, inspiring the Republican base and promising ‘change’ in Washington, McCain and his advisors have been exposed for what they truly are: what’s the right word? – Obama called them ‘sleazy’; other words like small minded and dishonest come to mind. A 72 year-old man who has spent the last quarter of a century in politics in Washington attempting to pass himself off as an agent of change : that has to rank as one of the greatest political sleight-of-hand in the history of U.S. presidential elections.
But what is almost funny it weren’t so pathetic, is watching McCain follow Palin around the country, like an infatuated school boy. That gave me an idea for an Obama advertisement:
Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin: the scene is a classroom filled with republicans (including McCain) as the pupils. Palin is the teacher. Palin is addressing the class (in that irritating high pitch tone of hers).
Palin: Listen up republicans; Obama’s plan will reduce taxes for those making $50k per year. Right?
Class of Republicans: Right
Palin: The citizens will also pay less taxes if they make $100k per year. Right?
Class of Republicans: Right
Palin: What about those making $150k per year?
Class of Republicans: They will pay less taxes under Obama’s plan than under our plan?
Palin: Very good class. Did you get that John?
John: I don’t get it.
Palin: Oh John you never get it, do you?
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Canada's Election
Prime Minister Harper of Canada announced a National Election last Sunday. This will be a sprint. Unlike the U.S. elections - which is a marathon, this will be over before the Americans cross the finish line.
It wasn't supposed to be like this. There was an agreement among the parties to have elections on a fixed date and at pre-determined intervals. But after Harper's astrologers - also called pollsters- predicted a majority for his minority government, principle and agreements were cast to the wind.
The pollster's have looked into their crystal balls and have predicted that the minority conservative goverment has a good chance of getting a majority of the parliamentary seats- if an election were called now. So never mind that we had a National election less than two years ago; or the cost. The conservatives have listened to their astrologers and have decided that it is better to go ahead now rather than later, when the omens are less favourable.
After many years of a vigorous liberal majority government, led by Jean Chretien, the new liberal leader Stephane Dion has failed to inspire the nation: but worse has allowed the conservatives to step all over him. The latest act, confirming their contempt for him, is a political ad showing a bird taking a crap on Dion.
Dion is no Chretien. Former Prime Minister Chretien has earned my everlasting respect, for telling George Bush that we Canadians "are not in the business of changing other peoples goverments". This was after he declined the American president's invitation to join in the invasion of Iraq.
Dion's message is confused. It appears that he his trying to run on a 'green' platform. But there is also an official Green Party. It sounds like incest to me. This kind of narrow message will always fail to appeal to the greater population.
That's why John Edward's anti-poverty platform, and Senator Clinton's gender-based message failed to resonate with a majority of voters. That kind of approach is more suited to the role of an activist. And no country wants an activist for it's President or Prime Minister.
It wasn't supposed to be like this. There was an agreement among the parties to have elections on a fixed date and at pre-determined intervals. But after Harper's astrologers - also called pollsters- predicted a majority for his minority government, principle and agreements were cast to the wind.
The pollster's have looked into their crystal balls and have predicted that the minority conservative goverment has a good chance of getting a majority of the parliamentary seats- if an election were called now. So never mind that we had a National election less than two years ago; or the cost. The conservatives have listened to their astrologers and have decided that it is better to go ahead now rather than later, when the omens are less favourable.
After many years of a vigorous liberal majority government, led by Jean Chretien, the new liberal leader Stephane Dion has failed to inspire the nation: but worse has allowed the conservatives to step all over him. The latest act, confirming their contempt for him, is a political ad showing a bird taking a crap on Dion.
Dion is no Chretien. Former Prime Minister Chretien has earned my everlasting respect, for telling George Bush that we Canadians "are not in the business of changing other peoples goverments". This was after he declined the American president's invitation to join in the invasion of Iraq.
Dion's message is confused. It appears that he his trying to run on a 'green' platform. But there is also an official Green Party. It sounds like incest to me. This kind of narrow message will always fail to appeal to the greater population.
That's why John Edward's anti-poverty platform, and Senator Clinton's gender-based message failed to resonate with a majority of voters. That kind of approach is more suited to the role of an activist. And no country wants an activist for it's President or Prime Minister.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)