Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Dynamic Duo


Yay! St. McCain and Holy Joe to the rescue! Yay! Alright. Anyways, via the great Ezra Klein, I was lead to this amazing column by Harold Meyerson in today's Washington Post. I really can't add any commentary to this because Meyerson's piece is exquisitely well-written and I couldn't possibly convey this argument anywhere near as effective as he can. Please read it, it's an important take on a man that is running for a very important position.

Hillary, PLEASE STOP!

The picture is becoming clearer everyday: Hillary Clinton does not care about the Democratic party. She's jumping on the meida bandwagon trying to condemn Barack Obama over his relationship with Jeremiah Wright. Josh Marshall has a great post about all of this. Clinton is turning to her sworn enemies to help her smear Obama. I mean the American Spectator, come on Hillary! She's granting interviews to right-wing rags now!?! It's baffling that Hillary Clinton is either completely ignorant of, or apathetic towards the damage she's doing to the Democratic Party. If she somehow manages to steal to the nomination by convincing the superdelegates that she is the more electable candidate, she will have suceeded only in shrinking the Democratic coalition that she will need to win the general election. There is a lot of resentment out there between Obama and Clinton supporters. I'm personally considering staying home, or writing in "Wolverine" or "Batman" if she's the nominee. This has ceased being a matter of convenience and transformed into a matter of political survival. Clinton needs to realize that the longer John McCain has to consolidate his base, the smaller our chances become of gaining the presidency. Howard Dean, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi need to get off their asses and take action. It would also help if Al Gore and John Edwards would just endorse someone already. It seems to me that each would most likely endorse Obama, but I've heard otherwise from some. Either way, their endorsements would lend huge credibility to either candidate and would also likely be accompanied by renewed or additional support. I think we should look into starting a fund to purchase a Wrap It Up Box for Hillary Clinton.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Hillary Clinton: McCain Cheerleader?

Jonathan Chait has interesting post up at the Plank examining whether or not Clinton would prefer a general election victory for John McCain over Barack Obama. I guess I'd like to think that Clinton wouldn't want this, and I doubt she does, but you never know. Chait makes a good point that Clinton would be the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in 2012 if Obama were to lose the general, but I think that her chances would be even more lackluster then than they are now. Granted, that assumes that McCain would have a successful first term. I doubt that would be the case, since McCain has shown recently that he has little expertise in pretty much any policy area, leadership included. However, as I've mentioned countless times, the media's love affair with the Saint would likely result in them painting a lovely portrait of a McCain presidency.

Anways, I digress, Chait also hammers on the fact that Clinton really has no shot at picking up the nomination. If she does (somehow) get the nomination, she will have gained it by convincing the superdelegates that Obama is a wanker. If she does that, I really think its safe to say that the Democratic Party will fall into civil war. Clinton has damaged herself in the eyes of many Democrats that would've otherwise supported her had she won the nomination fair and square. It should also be noted that independents and Republicans find Clinton more or less radioactive. It has to suck to be Hillary Clinton, I do still have some sympathy for her as there is no way to determine how much damage the media's coverage of her has done to her campaign. That being said, what's done is done and we have to move forward. Hillary needs to realize that her continued presence in this primary is damaging the Democratic Party and the progressive movement. In short, she just got reelected to another term in the Senate, she should look to the best interests of the people of New York and return to her duties as one of their elected voices.

Bacevich on Obama and McCain


Via Matt Yglesias, I found this great article by Andrew Bacevich. Bacevich, a conservative, argues that Barack Obama would be a better president for the conservative movement than George W. Bush has been, or John McCain ever could be. It's really very intriguing, I wouldn't mind Bacevich's wing of the conservative movement returning to prominence in the Republican party. The article goes into how true conservatism has been slowly dying since 1980. He argues that the Republican Party's devotion to corporate excess and American empire has brought about it's doom. Bacevich believes that as the common sense candidate, a Barack Obama presidency would bring about a political climate ripe for the destruction of neo- and corporate- conservatism.
I concur, and while I certainly have little sympathy for coservatism in any guise, it seems like the paleocons or traditional conservatives, if you will, are the more inherently reasonable people in the tent. These are the guys that are against premptive war, the police state, and corporate excess. They certainly have a number of disturbing cultural and economic beliefs, but they are much more open to compromise than those that currently dominate the Republican Party. Bacevich certainly is a reasonable fellow. His book, The New American Militarism should be widely read by conservatives and liberals alike.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

A Possible Solution

Via Marc Ambinder I found this interesting tidbit regarding the Florida delegate fiasco:
This comes from the ranking Democrat in the State Senate, Steven Geller (who hasn't endorsed anyone), and State Sen. Jeremy Ring. Half the delegates would be awarded on the basis of the Jan. 29 primary; the rest would allocated according to any number of scenarios, including an even split, a split reflecting the national popular vote, a split reflecting the national earned delegate count. To work, it would require both campaigns to sign on, and would require the DNC's credentials committee to approve it, a process that would not really begin until July.


Sounds like it could work. Obviously this means that Hillary Clinton would get more delegates than Obama, but let's face it fellow Obama supporters, if the DNC decides to seat the delegates at all, she's gonna win the state. However, Obama would still get a substantial amount of delegates, and I don't think this would effect his lead too much. At the same time though, it would seat the delegates, and shut the Clinton campaign up.

Delayed Response: Obama's Speech

Well, two days after the fact I still haven't said anything about Barack Obama's landmark speech on race in America. I thought it was brilliant and I can only hope that it will put the Jeremiah Wright controversy to rest. Obama managed to balance the speech very well. I was particularly impressed by how he explained that African-Americans' anger was justified. He also mentioned that the anger of some white Americans was justified. I'm not going into nearly enough detail on this, but I really don't have the time right now. So you should watch the speech and draw your own conclusions.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Five Years

I realize now that I neglected to mention in my previous post that today marks the 5th year anniversay of the Iraq war. Nearly 4,000 Americans have died and thousands upon thousand more have been greviously wounded, many of those individuals have likely suffered permanent damage. I would be remiss not to mention that hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have also been killed in the ensuing violence. Frankly there isn't much that I can say that I haven't articulated before in previous posts to this blog. There is no doubt that the war in Iraq has been one of the largest foreign policy blunders in American history. The fact that hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost or permanently altered, both American and Iraqi, in a war that was predicated on lies is a tragedy beyond my comprehension. I simply do not posess the ability to transcribe into words the profound sadness I feel whenever I think of the war.

I suppose what I could reflect upon on this 5-year anniversary is what I've personally learned over the past 5 years. In a way, I've finally understood how meaningless war is. The fact that countries (not just the U.S.) resort to violence and killing to solve problems or to reach a stated goal is a particularly barbaric reality. I can understand when wars are fought in self-defense; as it is necessary for one entity to respond appropriately to another that is trying to destroy it. I can also understand when war is necessary to stop regimes such as the Nazis or the Japanese Empire. These enemies were hell bent on killing millions simply because said millions were different from them, or because they occupied a territory that the aggressor desired. Enemies like this can seldom be reasoned with and war becomes a necessity rather than a means to an end. However, we should never go to war unless we've exhausted every other avenue that might lead to a peaceful resolution. This did not occur in Iraq. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator but he could have been dealt with had the UN been given the time and resources it needed. We should've exhaustively considered the consequences of our invasion. It's clear now that our government either was not aware, or more likely did not care about, the violent tensions between the Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish peoples of Iraq. It's also clear that there are those in our goverment whom to this day still don't understand the complicated ethnic and religous divisions within Iraq, John McCain chief among them.
I've learned that sometimes we are too quick to strike. We let our anger and our ignorance consume us, and rationality is left by the wayside. I believe that this is what happened with Iraq. 9/11 was still fresh in our minds and too many of us supported a war simply because we bought into the Bush Administration's lies that Saddam Hussein was partially responsible for the attacks on American soil.
I've learned that in times of crisis we often equate patriotism with supporting whatever the government does. We forget that one of the core principles of our democracy is our freedom to criticize our own government when we think it is wrong. Indeed the patriotism that existed after 9/11 through the first year of the Iraq war more closely resembled nationalism. Nationalism is a truly dangerous sentiment. It leads us to believe that we are superior to others, that we know what is best for other people. I consider myself a patriot, I love my country, but I am no nationalist.
I've learned that sometimes being a patriot isn't good enough. If your against the war you get questions like this: why don't you support the troops? Don't you know that your opposition helps the terrorists? Why do you hate America? I believe that we are better than this and that we have already begun to move past this. Unfortunately there are those in positions of power such as George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John McCain, and Joe Lieberman that will probably never understand this, and that is too bad for them.

This post/note should not be read as a mea culpa or a condemnation of anyone. It is simply my reflection over the past 5 years of war. I think we have all learned a lot and hopefully we have all emerged from this experience as better individuals. I suppose only time can tell. It is clear that war is terrible. Even when a war is successful there are many that are left dead and many of those that survive do so with lives that are for all practical purposes destroyed. It is true that there are those that return from war as better people. I would be remiss to deny such a thing. However the fact that so many lose so much as a result of such senseless violence is a calmity of the human condition.