Recently in America Category

This is one of Mr. Olbermann's occasional "special comments" from his week-nightly program Countdown with Keith Olbermann and you need to watch it. It aired yesterday and it's brilliant. It's truth spoken to power (albeit indirectly) like it is rarely seen on television in the United States (or anywhere else, for that matter) and it is genius. It's a bit long (12 minutes) but completely worth it. If you're even a little bit like I am, it will have you clapping, laughing, scowling and whooping at the ceiling. It's the news commentator's version of a beautiful jazz riff. It's goes, man! You just wish you were in the corner of a dark and smokey Greenwich Village bar, yelling "Go man, GO!" at the top of your lungs.

Yes, it's that good.

And while you're at it, if you like this, send an email to letters@msnbc.com and tell them that even if the barbarian hordes of the FCC, the GOP or Cheney himself descend on 30 Rock, the truth must be told and Keith must remain on the air.

In a somewhat surprising move, given his refusal to endorse on Monday, former senator John Edwards is set, momentarily, to endorse Senator Barack Obama at a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan. This is a major endorsement for Obama and should go some way towards courting the white, working class voters that so far seem to be eluding Senator Obama. CNN will carry the speech live.

It's not like I really needed a push to support Obama. I think his campaign style has changed and his rhetoric has become more serious and purposeful and substantive. That said, this endorsement makes me even more determined that Barack Obama be the next president of the United States.

More on the speech after its conclusion.

UPDATE:

Well, I think that was a fantastic speech, to be honest. I think it could have used a little more overt mentions of race, but my gut tells me Edwards will be speaking more overtly about race in the weeks and months to come. One question I have is, was this an audition for the VP slot? Conventional wisdom and my spies say no, that Edwards has his sights set on Attorney General (and wouldn't that be amazing?). Not only that, but Edwards isn't a sitting office holder and doesn't guarantee any staes (although he'd certainly help in the white, working-class South. However, a democratic ticket with two candidates running to the left of center, neither of which have military experience is a pretty bad idea, IMHO. Jim Webb, anyone?

This sign gave me visions of Joe Buck wearing a kimono while working in a massage parlor to pay off his modeling school debts.

I think I need more sleep.

So recently, I've been thinking that John McCain just might have a serious chance to win in November, along comes this douchebag...again. Please Ralph, don't do it! I don't think the country can take it.

A friend of mine reports that when she went to vote in Brooklyn on Tuesday and used a paper ballot, the only choices were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. From what I know, this is a violation, since John Edwards was still on the New York State ballot. I know, because I voted for him. I also am not sure as to why she would have been given a paper ballot (I forgot to ask), since according to this, there are only three reasons one would even receive a paper ballot.
Can anyone out there shed some light on this?

Ever since my choice for the democratic nomination, John Edwards, suspended his campaign, I have been besieged by friend and stranger alike, urging me to vote for Barack Obama. Literally no one I know has approached me about Hillary. Maybe that says something about my friends or Hillary or maybe it says something about me. It doesn't matter, because the only way I hold my nose and vote for her is if she's the nominee in November. The thing is, I couldn't bring myself to vote for Obama, either. Many of my friends are somewhat incredulous at my recalcitrance, but I have my reasons.

First a little background. My mother was a proud and politically active woman of mixed ethnicity but I think she identified most often as black. She was a filmmaker, author and journalist and paid close attention to the goings on of the day. She was deeply involved in the Civil Rights movement and I was raised in an politically aware home. But let's be honest, unless you know me or are very race conscious, you wouldn't know I was anything but Caucasian (or maybe Latino. I get that on the streets of NYC all the time). That said, I was raised in a multi-ethnic home and am myself very conscious of my heritage.

I am a feminist and a civil rights activist and I would be more than happy to see the first woman president or the first black president. The thing is, I will not and cannot sacrifice my overall political beliefs and I flatly refuse to do something so base and crass as to sell my vote for race or gender. This year's race for the democratic nomination has been framed by the media for over a year as Clinton vs. Obama and as a result, the candidate most committed to the wellbeing of the people, John Edwards, was marginalized from the start. He really never had a chance and for that, the mainstream media should be ashamed. It's clear, at least from my perspective, that John Edwards preached what was fair and good: An end to the dominance of Big Pharma and the insurance company lobby, the return of the government to the people, the end of corporate media dominance...oh.... Ooops!

So, John Edwards was, for my money, the most progressive, committed and honest person in the democratic race and he got my support. When he dropped out, I fully expected a switch to click in my head and start to get excited about Obama, but you know what? I couldn't do it. I don't like his heathcare plan, he strikes me as an appeaser, I don't fully trust him and he never says anything. It drives me nuts. His speeches are like revival meetings and while I love a good call-and-response, "Yes we can" doesn't really say much besides, well, "yes we can." Besides, I'm loyal. When I support someone, I support them and in the absence of an endorsement from Edwards, I felt no compelling urge to vote for Obama.

The thing is, it's all about November, for me and who can beat John McCain (for he's clearly the likely nominee). Unfortunately, the only candidate who was the clear winner in that contest is no longer in the race. In poll after poll, you democrats all over the country named Edwards as the candidate you thought could most beat the republicans in November and in poll after poll you named Edwards as the candidate who most cared about people. And what did you all do? You voted against your interests and against the interests of the country as a whole. I just don't get it. If you really thought Obama or Clinton were more likely to win, the results would make sense, but you didn't. You said Edwards was a better candidate and cared more about you and then you went out and voted for someone else. Shame on you.

Photo of John Edwards by George P. Stern

This was reported over the weekend but I am only now getting to it. Once again we have some evidence that not everyone votes with the media. The smart vote, the smart play, the real, caring position is to vote with your head. Not with the color of your skin and not with your gender. Yes, an African American president would be an amazing and historic event, as would a woman president. But that's not how we should be voting. Ask yourself a few questions:

Who has a position on the war that makes most sense?
Whose health care plan takes care of the most Americans?
Who really cares for the working class of America and acknowledges that we actually have poor people here in the United States and doesn't just keep repeating "middle class" in a cheap attempt to avoid admitting that there's an underclass?
In short, who really gives a damn about those who need the most care? About the veterans who can't get health care? About the homeless? I know most of you reading this are not poor, are not homeless but there's a very important message to take way: There but by the grace of god go I. Whether you believe in god or not, this is a lesson to learn. It doesn't take a whole lot to drop a few tax brackets and end up on the outs.

It's not a sin to be poor. It's not wrong to admit that we've failed as a nation and that America has let millions of people fall through the cracks. It's not "bad politics" to say "Our system is broken." What is wrong? What is evil? What is unforgivable? To not fix it! To fail to do everything possible to help these people who are in need and to lift them up and give them a hand. Now that would be a sin.

Over the weekend, the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.'s son, Martin Luther King III wrote the following letter of support to John Edwards. I hope you take it to heart and to head and vote for John in a primary near you!

January 20, 2008
The Honorable John R. Edwards
410 Market Street
Suite 400
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 cause 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.

Sincerely,

Martin L. King, III

Larry Miller (10 Things I Hate About You) has a new piece at The Huffington Post about the WGA strike and it's pretty fantastic. It puts the issues into simple and concise terms and engaging imagery (do screenplays really equal commodes, Mr. Meyer?).

"There Is Power In A Union"
by Billy Bragg

There is power in a factory, power in the land
Power in the hand of the worker
But it all amounts to nothing if together we don't stand
There is power in a Union

Now the lessons of the past were all learned with workers blood
The mistakes of the bosses we must pay for
From the cities and the farmlands to trenches full of mud
War has always been the bosses way, sir

The Union forever, defending our rights
Down with the blackleg, all workers unite
With our brothers and our sisters from many far-off lands
There is power in a Union

Now I long for the morning that they realise
Brutality and unjust laws cannot defeat us
But who'll defend the workers who cannot organise
When the bosses send their lackeys out to cheat us?

Money speaks for money, the Devil for his own
Who comes to speak for the skin and the bone?
What a comfort for the widow,a light to the child
There is power in a Union

The Union forever, defending our rights
Down with the blackleg, all workers unite
With our brothers and our sisters together we will stand
There is power in a Union

CNN had 17 undecided South Carolina voters rating the candidates throughout the debate. At the end, according to CNN, they thought Edwards had won the debate but "half" of them were going to vote for Obama because they felt he had the better chance of winning the nomination.

Don't they understand that if everyone who felt that way actually voted for Edwards, he might have a realistic chance at winning? This is an amazing and historic primary campaign, but also a supremely frustrating one.

For the next two hours I hope to bring you some of my thoughts on how this debate is going. I am an Edwards supporter, but I will do my best to be fair analyzing their debate performance. The format is very interesting and CNN is basically allowing a free form debate!

10:04-I think this debate gave the people of South Carolina a great deal to think about. My analysis, for what it's worth is that Obama and Edwards gained and I think Edwards could seriously make a strong 3rd place showing. Hillary didn't really seem to have "it" and even got boo'd! This is probably the most exciting election cycle in my lifetime.

10:01-Good answer by Edwards, great one by Obama. Tepid applause, however.
10:00-Wow. Last question by Wolf: If Dr. King were alive, why would he endorse you?
9:59-Edwards makes a very strong foreign policy statement.
9:55-The "lobbyist" issue rears its ugly head. Hillary is simply wrong on this.
9:46-Edwards makes a very good case that if McCain's the GOP candidate, he is the only one who can whip McCain's butt. And you know what? he's right.
CNN's Bill Schneider is blogging this debate quite well over on CNN's main 2008 election site.
9:36-Obama points out the difference between his race and the very real problem of race in America. Very good points. Again, Edwards is "just the white guy."
9:30-Joe Johns asks Obama: "Do you think Bil Clinton was our first black president." Gives him a chance to bridge the races.
9:27-Edwards is becoming the butt of "white male" jokes.
9:22-Now we're getting into race and the question facing Edwards and Clinton: Should people of color vote for white people if they're voting in their best self interest?
9:11-Break
9:10-This issue, Iraq, isn't enough to differentiate these three candidates all that much.
9:05-Edwards on Bush thinking that the surge in Iraq is the means to a political end: "If Bush recognizes it, then man it's really got to be out there."
9:03-Hillary says there's no military solution to the war.
9:01-Here come the war questions...
8:56-All three give good answers on their healthcare plans. Obama really does differ from Clinton and Edwards on this.
8:49-Suzanne Malveaux tosses Hillary a softball about HIV/AIDS.
8:47-Edwards places himself above the frey, but doesn't let Obama respond.
8:45-Hillary is treating the viewers like idiots. Like we don't know why senators sometimes vote against bills that on the surface seem good but don't go far enough. She also attacks Obama on some of his votes and is slammed again.
8:43-Hillary gets boo'd! Amazing. She looks like she's going down in flames!
8:40-More sniping between Obama and Clinton. They really don't like each other, it seems.
8:34-Edwards outright calls the economic power structure in the United States racist.
8:31-Edwards starts to separate he and Obama from Hillary and brings some humor into the debate: "Let me finish because lord knows, you let them go on forever!"
8:30-Edwards pulls the debate back on track.
8:26-WOW! Obama just delivered a huge uppercut to Hillary re: her stint on the board of Wal Mart and clarifying his statements about Ronald Reagan very well. This debate is degenerating.
8:22-Obama launches the first serious shot across Hillary's bow by claiming things she say aren't true. Goes after Bill Clinton, too. So far this is Obama's best debate performace.
8:20-Obama and Edwards spar a little bit on free trade and economic stimulus. I still think Edwards and Obama are a natural team, come November.
8:15-Edwards gives a good position but doesn't exactly answer the question. Looks bad denying an immediate cash payout to poor people.
8:10-Hillary gives a decent answer to the question.
8:08-First question on the economy from Joe Johns.

I know the mainstream media has written him off and I know many of you reading this have, as well. Those of us that support him have not. We can not. We will not.

In a recent interview on local South Carolina TV news, Edwards supporter Harry Belafonte points out that while the other candidates consistently discuss the plight of the middle class, Edwards is the only one to talk about the poor. That's an important distinction, in my opinion.

After the debate, please take a moment to watch this video of John Edwards speaking today at the state capitol in Columbia, South Carolina.

Now, I'm not saying that Ron Paul is a racist but boy howdy, he certainly did employ one...or two or three, even! Paul's response to the discovery of the sickening rants in the Ron Paul Political Report is pathetic. His excuse is basically that he doesn't know who wrote the screeds but that's not good enough. He's a member of the US House of Representatives and these words were going out under his name. He needs to find out who wrote them and make sure those persons are not still working for his organization.

CNN.com writes: "The presidential hopeful described the newsletter revelations as a 'rehash' of old material dug up by his opponents because he is gaining ground with black voters due to his stance against the war in Iraq and the war on drugs." Rehash? WTF? It's not a rehash, it's a discovery.

Ron Paul's a phony. It's about time people recognized that.

Well, Hillary did it. In spite of polls counting her out by double digits and the Obama campaign intimating her campaign's demise, she just won the New Hampshire primary and we have witnessed one of the more amazing nights in recent political history. Hillary's campaign looks more alive than ever and her acceptance speech was more natural and engaging than I have heard her sound in ages. Interestingly, she adapted much of the style and rhetoric of John Edwards in her speech. She mentioned Big Pharma as well as insurance and oil companies, much as Edwards has been doing for months.

According to John Donvan of ABC News and other sources, the Clinton campaign was down and expecting defeat, so even the campaign itself believed the polls. They were wrong and even the co-sponsor of the major rolling New Hampshire poll, CNN, has no idea what happened. A very interesting night!

But so what?

Here's something that for some reason (Hmmmmm, ratings?) the news organizations don't report very much or even at all. The "wins" in the primaries and caucuses as well as the polls all mean exactly...zero. Just like in the general election, the nomination process is based on delegates. Delegates to the national conventions are won according to a percentage of votes in the primaries. For example, Hillary won a HUGE victory in New Hampshire, right? Well, sort of. In delegate counts, Clinton and Obama each got 9 and Edwards picked up 4. Not such a huge win, after all. In Iowa it's even weirder. Obama won a MASSIVE victory there, right? Well, he picked up 16 delegates while Edwards got 14 and Clinton got 15. Wait, didn't Edwards beat Clinton in Iowa? Yup. Don't ask me man. ABC News has it 18, 16 and 16.

Then we get into "super delegates," which CNN.com describes as:
Superdelegates in the Democratic Party are typically members of the Democratic National Committee, elected officials like senators or governors, or party leaders. They do not have to indicate a candidate preference and do not have to compete for their position. If a superdelegate dies or is unable to participate at the convention, alternates do not replace that delegate, which would reduce the total delegates number and the "magic number" needed to clinch the nomination.

Ohhhhhh k!

The current delegate count, including superdelegates, stands at:

Hillary Clinton - 183
Barak Obama - 78
John Edwards - 52
Bill Richardson - 19
Dennis Kucinich - 1

What do they need to lock up the nomination? 2,025. Out of a total of 4,049 up for grabs, a whopping 333 have been awarded.

It's a bit of a head scratcher to be sure, but what's really important to realize is that Obama, Edwards and Clinton have not really lost any primaries or caucuses, at least not in the traditional sense of winner take all. A few more primaries with the three of them swapping places and the delegate count evens up. Hell, if Clinton and Obama beat up on each other and Edwards keeps coming in second.....Ok, ok. That's less than likely, but my point is, it's not about winning or losing primaries...at least it shouldn't be. Of the 4,049 delegates in play, 8.22% have been awarded.

Personally, I'd like to see the process go on a bit. After all, that's what the process is about, no? Giving the American people the chance to elect a new leader? Fewer than 1% of the voters have spoken, don't you think we owe it to the other 99% to give them a chance?

Now if the press would actually start reporting it like it is.....

Some thoughts while the debate goes on...

In the Spin Room: Apparently, Hillary Clinton's campaign says she had a very strong night. That's not spinning, that's lying.

10:38pm: Admittedly, I am an Edwards supporter, but I have seen dozens of debates in the past 25 years and in my opinion and that of friends watching with me, John Edwards won this debate, clear and away.

10:32pm: Bill Richardson shows a fantastic sense of humor when he regrets naming Byron "Whizzer" White as his favorite supreme court justice.

10:21pm: I have to say, Obama really drives me nuts with his equivocating and "self-help" speech. He's so vague, half the time.

10:13pm: Obama dodges question about the watering down of his ban on lobbyists paying for meals.

10:10PM: Edwards is sounding and looking more presidential than he has in many debates.

9:54pm: Break time. I'd like to take this time out to ask....Does anyone think it's weird that in less than four years after its founding in February of 2004, Facebook is the co-sponsor of an important presidential debate?

9:51pm: Oh, how wrong I was about Bill. Yes, he's cuddly, but yes, he's presidential.

9:46pm: Obama on Iraq: "We should be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in." Great quote.

9:34pm: Obama and Edwards are putting Hillary on the defensive. Edwards is totally pushing Hillary back into the status quo pile. She's really sounding shrill and defensive.

9:27pm: Obama avoids health care mandates by claiming that when he goes into his town meetings, he doesn't see people who are avoiding paying for health care he sees people who want it but can't afford it, but I say that's only because those who can afford it but choose not to are likely not Obama supporters.

9:21pm: So far, this is a much more sedate and polite debate. Dare I say, boring? Maybe it's her placement on the stage, but Hillary seems like an afterthought.

9:18pm: Charlie Gibson scares the shit out of us by threatening us with a nuclear weapon attack in a US city. Note to self, "Move to small town."

9:15pm: Good point, Bill! We backed the Shah and it bit us in the ass. Richardson's a good man, but he's got the Q rating of a teddy bear. Good ol' cuddly Bill! But presidential? Nope.

9:14pm: Hillary lost me. Why is she getting into specifics about what happens if we launch missiles into Pakistan.

9:11pm: Wow. Bill Richardson just said he'd ask Musharraf to "temporarily" step aside. Bold call.

9:03pm: And they're off!

9:00pm: he Dems are about to start.

8:41pm: The GOP debate is over and IMHO, John McCain won. Mitt Romney looked like a complete stiff. The rest of the candidates really don't like Romney! The photo op with the democrats was a rather interesting and historic moment.

8:26pm: Mitt Romney for the umpteenth time is ragged on by McCain ("Governor Romney, you are indeed the candidate for change," referring to Romney's flip flopping on issues) and others. Mitt really has a thin skin and no sense of humor. He can't give or take!

8:25pm: Fred Thompson names the NEA and a "liberal interest group" whose policies Obama has adopted. Ooooh, scary! The National Endowment of the Arts!

8:20pm: These people are talking about building a fucking border fence, for god's sake! That's absolutely crazy.

8:14pm: Mitt Romney has the sense of humor of a lump of coal.

8:12pm Regarding illegal immigration, do these people who are against amnesty or a permanent residency program have an idea who might clean their homes, care for their children, pick their fruits and cook their foods? Illegal immigration is a red herring. It's not an issue. Every developed country in the world has a very important segment of their economy that runs on ilegal immigration.

John McCain just said that big pharmaceutical companies are the bad guys!

Ron Paul is a phony. All these young people giving him money and he's a) Pro-life, b) is against any amnesty or citizenship path for illegal immigrants and is in favor of a border fence, c) is against same-sex marriage but believes it's a state issue (like abortion, read: cop out) and d) supports extending Bush's tax cuts through 2010 and supports eliminating income tax. Sounds crazy to me. He's like Jerry Brown with a cheaper suit.

The Axe in the Attic
Directed by Ed Pincus & Lucia Small

After the New Orleans flood of 1965, many of those who survived would keep an axe in their attic so that, in the event the water should ever again rise to the top of their homes, they would have a way out. Interestingly, some of the survivors of Hurricane Katrina, forever immortalized in TV and still images, standing on their roofs hoping for rescue owe their lives to this practice. Now documentary makers Lucia Small and Ed Pincus bring us The Axe in the Attic, a fine contribution to the 45th New York Film Festival and one that pulls no punches. Where's the outrage you may ask; this remarkable documentary gives its subjects - both victims as well as its creators - a platform for expressing it. The results are moving.

Don't allow the blip of controversy about this movie get in the way of checking it out. While Spike Lee's When The Levees Broke, a powerful and necessary work of documentary film making itself, is planted firmly in New Orleans interviewing survivors and celebrities alike, Pincus and Small hit the road for a 60-day tour of America's back roads to find their subjects. It's no exaggeration to suggest that those displaced residents of New Orleans belong to the single largest American diaspora. They can be found in FEMA trailer parks and crashing with family, but their collective feelings of depression and hope are truly profound. The controversy - or criticism - that the film is generating has to do with the two filmmakers inserting themselves so centrally into the story. Many of said critics believe that the focus ought to be solely on the victims and that showing the film maker's own problems just intrudes on the victims' dignity and to be honest, at times their presence does have a taint of narcissism, but ultimately I found the decision to be a successful device.