The curious incident of the Republican governor of Florida on all of the talk shows yesterday ought to have raised an eyebrow or two among rank and file Democrats. He would not budge from his script: 'the voters of Florida went to the polls in record numbers in the primary and cast their votes which should be counted.' No matter what the question the reporter asked, the answer was always the same: count the votes.
I'm having a dé·jà vu moment.
'Count the votes?' Coming from a Republican in Florida? Excuse me while I knock my head against the wall....
Governor Crist wants the Florida DEMOCRATIC primary vote to stand. Red flags! Red flags!
Why the hell does he care so much about the DEMOCRATIC primary results?
The Curious incident of the Florida Governor.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Right on Schedule: Al-Qaida may be plotting to attack the U.S., general says
The timing is just perfect: right after John McCain gets the Godfather kiss from George W. we read, Al-Qaida may be plotting to attack the U.S., general says
Amazingly coincidental. The GOP candidate who has been the Bush War poodle, the candidate who tauts his 'national security' credentials at every rally, just happens to be the beneficiary of coincidental good news. Wow! What timing. If only the rest of us were so lucky in life. He should have bought a lottery ticket yesterday as well.
Be afraid; be terribly afraid.
Amazingly coincidental. The GOP candidate who has been the Bush War poodle, the candidate who tauts his 'national security' credentials at every rally, just happens to be the beneficiary of coincidental good news. Wow! What timing. If only the rest of us were so lucky in life. He should have bought a lottery ticket yesterday as well.
Be afraid; be terribly afraid.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
NAFTA-gate: It Was Hillary!
"Shame on you, Barack Obama!" she said with disdain in her voice. She was mad about a flier that Obama put out about NAFTA and her support of it in the days before the Ohio election. However, as usual, The Clintons spun the story to make Obama look bad just before Ohio's primary election. Something about a leaked memo to Canada about a wink-wink on NAFTA. Perhaps Obama lost Ohio because of that 'memo.'
Well, well, shame on you, Hillary Clinton!" Looks like it was a CLINTON memo to the Canadians. The Globe and Mail reports today:
OTTAWA -- The leak of a confidential diplomatic discussion that rocked the U.S. presidential campaign began with an offhand remark to journalists from the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Ian Brodie.
Mr. Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA threats were mostly political posturing.
The Canadian Press cited an unnamed source last night as saying that several people overheard the remark.
The news agency quoted that source as saying that Mr. Brodie said that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign called and was "telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt."
-----------------------
Interesting how it became Obama's memo, isn't it? Clever Clintons. Keep your eye on them for more spins, twists and turns.
Well, well, shame on you, Hillary Clinton!" Looks like it was a CLINTON memo to the Canadians. The Globe and Mail reports today:
OTTAWA -- The leak of a confidential diplomatic discussion that rocked the U.S. presidential campaign began with an offhand remark to journalists from the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Ian Brodie.
Mr. Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA threats were mostly political posturing.
The Canadian Press cited an unnamed source last night as saying that several people overheard the remark.
The news agency quoted that source as saying that Mr. Brodie said that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign called and was "telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt."
-----------------------
Interesting how it became Obama's memo, isn't it? Clever Clintons. Keep your eye on them for more spins, twists and turns.
Hillary's Blather for the Dumbed-Down Voters
Upon winning the Ohio primary on Tuesday evening, Hillary Clinton said to supporters gathered to cheer her, "You all know that if we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win the battleground states, just like Ohio. And that is what we've done. We've won Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Arkansas, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Tennessee."
Excuse me, Mrs. Clinton, but your pitiful geopolitical knowledge seems to be showing. Since when have Massachusetts, California, New Jersey, New York, and Michigan turned red? They haven't voted for a Republican president in 20 years.
I've another question: Oklahoma? What is your plan to turn Oklahoma blue this year? The last time Oklahoma voted for a Democrat was for Lyndon Johnson in 1964. No doubt Arizona will be solidly red with its senator running on the GOP side. Tell us, what is your strategy to shake Texas from the grip of the GOP this fall? And Tennessee?
The fact is that Mrs. Clinton has 'taken' the blue states while Obama has taken many red states. What does that information indicate? I'm betting that red states Virginia and Missouri, both won by Obama, are much easier plucking this year for the Democrats than Oklahoma and Texas. Add to that Colorado, now trending blue, also won by Obama.
Let's not throw names around without knowing the facts. Not all of us are dumbed-down, ya know.
Excuse me, Mrs. Clinton, but your pitiful geopolitical knowledge seems to be showing. Since when have Massachusetts, California, New Jersey, New York, and Michigan turned red? They haven't voted for a Republican president in 20 years.
I've another question: Oklahoma? What is your plan to turn Oklahoma blue this year? The last time Oklahoma voted for a Democrat was for Lyndon Johnson in 1964. No doubt Arizona will be solidly red with its senator running on the GOP side. Tell us, what is your strategy to shake Texas from the grip of the GOP this fall? And Tennessee?
The fact is that Mrs. Clinton has 'taken' the blue states while Obama has taken many red states. What does that information indicate? I'm betting that red states Virginia and Missouri, both won by Obama, are much easier plucking this year for the Democrats than Oklahoma and Texas. Add to that Colorado, now trending blue, also won by Obama.
Let's not throw names around without knowing the facts. Not all of us are dumbed-down, ya know.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Lucas County [Toledo] Odd City in Clinton/Obama primary
The map shows the strength of Hillary Clinton in shades of red. Shades of blue, Obama, appear in the Ohio counties with large cities. Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Dayton all voted heavily for Obama.The lone exception on Tuesday was Lucas County and its large city, Toledo. Clinton received 52% of the vote. That makes this county/city unique in the state and prompts the question, Why?
It seems odd that, with all of the Obama workers walking door-to-door, the 5 satellite Obama offices to serve the neighborhoods, the TV and radio spots, and the huge 15,000 person rally at UT, that Hillary would carry the county.
Was it voter apathy? Did the Clinton team do a better job of getting out the vote? What was it that makes Lucas County the odd one out?
Clinton Moves Goal Posts Once Again
The count of delegates does not include delegates from Florida and Michigan, who were penalized by the Democratic Party for moving up their primaries ahead of a schedule set by the Democratic National Committee. None of the Democratic candidates campaigned in either state. But Clinton, who won the popular vote in both state primaries, on Wednesday renewed her call for Florida and Michigan to be counted in the nomination race.
"It's a mistake for the Democratic Party to punish these two states," she said. "I don't see how a Democratic nominee goes forward alienating two of the most important states."
Oh really? How very interesting. They 'should count' because she 'won' them. Slick stuff. But then, she's part of the good old boy's political machine. So much for 'change.'
"It's a mistake for the Democratic Party to punish these two states," she said. "I don't see how a Democratic nominee goes forward alienating two of the most important states."
Oh really? How very interesting. They 'should count' because she 'won' them. Slick stuff. But then, she's part of the good old boy's political machine. So much for 'change.'
Bloomberg Memo Predicted Mar. 4 Primary Results
A memo, inadvertently sent by the Obama campaign to Bloomberg, correctly predicted the outcome of Tuesday's primary in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont. The numbers nearly matched the outcomes perfectly. This internal memo, written on Feb. 3, goes on to predict Obama losing Pennsylvania, Kentucky and West Virginia, while he picks up Indiana, Mississippi and Wyoming among others. Tim Russert revealed the memo and the numbers on MSNBC's Morning Joe program.
In the end, the memo predicts that Obama will have a delegate advantage of 1806 to 1789. This scenario does not include Michigan and Florida which the DNC nulled due to moving up their primaries.
Two things anger me. First, and quite personally, I watched the two young Obama workers who stayed at our house for the past 20 days work their butts off when the gurus had already marked off Ohio to the Clinton camp back in early February. Why did they need to work so hard, so many long hours, when the campaign operatives knew it was futile? Two over-60 volunteer workers fell yesterday on the ice, including my wife who spent 3 hours in the ER getting an X-ray and a cast on her foot! How painfully futile.
The second point of contention is that if this scenario is correct, the two camps will go marching along separately and hostile to each other into the summer. No doubt the Clinton camp will demand that her 'victories' in Florida and Michigan be counted, setting the stage for a very divisive convention fight.
Will the two camps merge thereafter? I doubt it and here's why: the demographics of the two camps are in conflict. Black Americans see Obama as their hope of reclaiming the dignity that has eluded them as a race throughout the sad history of their time in America. Historic civil rights activist and Georgia Congressman John Lewis, upon switching to Obama, said, Something's happening in America, something some of us did not see coming. Barack Obama has tapped into something that is extraordinary." I believe he meant that a black man has the potential of rising to the highest office of the land.
The second demographic group that will be disillusioned if Clinton grabs the nomination through shenanigans will the the young voters who were attracted to the process through Obama's message of hope and change. If they see the dirty old political maneuverings operating to snag the nomination away from Obama, they will be turned off in the fall and may, in fact, become the cynical American who says, 'Why vote, my vote doesn't matter anyway?'
I see the so-called 'Clinton Political Machine' gearing up even more now that she has scored those victories Tuesday. We will be seeing more sleazy ads like the red phone at 3 AM. Divisive politics is their game. I'm afraid that she is on a slippery slope that only heads downward, taking lots of Democrats with her.
It is the process that is at stake from here on. Will a well-oiled political machine once again derail a more idealistic, more grassroots movement? I am afraid it will and the race card is not out of the question at all.
In the end, the memo predicts that Obama will have a delegate advantage of 1806 to 1789. This scenario does not include Michigan and Florida which the DNC nulled due to moving up their primaries.
Two things anger me. First, and quite personally, I watched the two young Obama workers who stayed at our house for the past 20 days work their butts off when the gurus had already marked off Ohio to the Clinton camp back in early February. Why did they need to work so hard, so many long hours, when the campaign operatives knew it was futile? Two over-60 volunteer workers fell yesterday on the ice, including my wife who spent 3 hours in the ER getting an X-ray and a cast on her foot! How painfully futile.
The second point of contention is that if this scenario is correct, the two camps will go marching along separately and hostile to each other into the summer. No doubt the Clinton camp will demand that her 'victories' in Florida and Michigan be counted, setting the stage for a very divisive convention fight.
Will the two camps merge thereafter? I doubt it and here's why: the demographics of the two camps are in conflict. Black Americans see Obama as their hope of reclaiming the dignity that has eluded them as a race throughout the sad history of their time in America. Historic civil rights activist and Georgia Congressman John Lewis, upon switching to Obama, said, Something's happening in America, something some of us did not see coming. Barack Obama has tapped into something that is extraordinary." I believe he meant that a black man has the potential of rising to the highest office of the land.
The second demographic group that will be disillusioned if Clinton grabs the nomination through shenanigans will the the young voters who were attracted to the process through Obama's message of hope and change. If they see the dirty old political maneuverings operating to snag the nomination away from Obama, they will be turned off in the fall and may, in fact, become the cynical American who says, 'Why vote, my vote doesn't matter anyway?'
I see the so-called 'Clinton Political Machine' gearing up even more now that she has scored those victories Tuesday. We will be seeing more sleazy ads like the red phone at 3 AM. Divisive politics is their game. I'm afraid that she is on a slippery slope that only heads downward, taking lots of Democrats with her.
It is the process that is at stake from here on. Will a well-oiled political machine once again derail a more idealistic, more grassroots movement? I am afraid it will and the race card is not out of the question at all.
Monday, March 3, 2008
McCain Answers the Phone at 3 AM
WACO, Texas — Republican front-runner John McCain responded Monday to Hillary Rodham Clinton's question about which presidential candidate should be trusted to answer an emergency call to the White House at 3 a.m
.
"I'm certainly the most experienced and qualified to answer that phone," McCain told reporters before making his final swing through Texas ahead of today's primary here and in three other states.
"I'm certainly the most experienced and qualified to answer that phone," McCain told reporters before making his final swing through Texas ahead of today's primary here and in three other states.
"I've been involved in every major national security challenge for the last 20 years that has faced this country," McCain said in Phoenix, before his Texas campaign swing.
---------------------------
RINGGGGGGG! RINGGGGGGGGGG!
"Hello, John here." "What say? Wars and more wars, my friend!"
Iran's Ahmadinejad Has a Plan to Help Us Leave Iraq
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, upon leaving Baghdad after a 2-day visit, said rather plainly that Americans should get out. CNN reports:
"No one likes them," said Ahmadinejad, who departed Iraq after a news conference on Monday.
"We believe that the forces which crossed oceans and thousands of kilometers to come to this region, should leave this region and hand over the affairs to the people's and government of this region," Ahmadinejad said.
"We believe that the forces which crossed oceans and thousands of kilometers to come to this region, should leave this region and hand over the affairs to the people's and government of this region," Ahmadinejad said.
Well, well, that's a fine how-do-you-do! After all that we 'did' for Iraq, we get the cold shoulder. Reminds me of that old saying, both fish and friends stink after three days.
Two Presidents Visit Baghdad: One Openly, One Stealth
EngineerofKnowledge, a regular visitor to this blog, sent me this in an email:
The post on Sunday, “Three headlines Prove the Impotency of the Bush Administration,” inspired these thoughts. I think of the beginning of the war with Bush saying, “We will be welcomed as liberators” like the American troops would have laurel reefs laid at their feet as they march into Baghdad. Now, he has to fly in and out of Iraq for a photo shoot without even notifying the President of Iraq that he is going to do it. The risk of him being shot in Iraq when he is there would be way too high. Now Ahmadinejad goes into Iraq leading a parade and is welcomed as the alliance to purge the U.S. out of Iraq. No Problem!!
I know that in the beginning stages of the invasion, John Nash’s “Game Theory” was done and no matter how the variables were applied, all of the outcomes were that Iran ended up with all of the political influence through religion in Iraq. This administration knew this going in from the start. This latest example is nothing more than proof to that fact.
---------------------------------
All bluster and little substance might paraphrase these thoughts; this is the George Bush we have come to know over the last 7 years. There seems to be very little 'stuff' inside this man- a rather hollow and cavalier folksy guy who never grew out of his adolescent stage of life. It has been like watching a B-movie unfold, filled with poor acting and clichés with a very thin plot line.
I'm truly reminded of my own adolescent years [ugh!] when I watch and listen to George Bush. Thankfully I moved to manhood so that I would not embarrass my family any further. George Bush, on the other hand, embarrasses us on a daily basis.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
What do Action Verbs Say About a Candidate?
The Toledo Blade compared the 4 leading candidates in an article called, Where They Stand on the Issues. The 4-column piece compared the candidates on 5 issues: Trade, Health Care, Environment, Deficit, and Education. [article not linked on net]
I am wondering about the opening verb of each issue statement as a comparison of their strength. What judgment can be made based on that action verb? Who knows, but here is that analysis.
Hillary Clinton: revise, double, opt out, eliminate, require, prohibit, provide, auction, create, set up, set, reform, protect, move toward, reverse, emphasize, end, ensure, recruit, create, provide, offer, create, make, cut.
Barack Obama: use, oppose, pressure, stop, opt out, make available, create, require, use, invest, invest, require, enforce, repeal, require, offer, expand, step up, regard, create, simplify.
John McCain: insist, ensure, reduce, commit to, control, promote, provide, make, expand, make, confront, encourage, reduce, set, ensure, reform, get, empower.
Mike Huckabee: support, advocate, oppose, reform, focus on, use, achieve, set, support, replace, give, make, expand, test, provide, pay, set, revise.
So, what does this all mean?
I am wondering about the opening verb of each issue statement as a comparison of their strength. What judgment can be made based on that action verb? Who knows, but here is that analysis.
Hillary Clinton: revise, double, opt out, eliminate, require, prohibit, provide, auction, create, set up, set, reform, protect, move toward, reverse, emphasize, end, ensure, recruit, create, provide, offer, create, make, cut.
Barack Obama: use, oppose, pressure, stop, opt out, make available, create, require, use, invest, invest, require, enforce, repeal, require, offer, expand, step up, regard, create, simplify.
John McCain: insist, ensure, reduce, commit to, control, promote, provide, make, expand, make, confront, encourage, reduce, set, ensure, reform, get, empower.
Mike Huckabee: support, advocate, oppose, reform, focus on, use, achieve, set, support, replace, give, make, expand, test, provide, pay, set, revise.
So, what does this all mean?
Three headlines Prove the Impotency of the Bush Administration
The first 3 headlines on Yahoo News this morning prove the impotence and incompetence of the Bush Administration during these past 8 years:
Ahmadinejad calls Iraq 'brotherly'
Russia votes for Putin's successor
Israeli aircraft target Hamas office
And these are just the international headlines. For now, we'll pass over the recession, mortgage crisis, the National Debt, inflation, and unequal distribution of wealth, trade, and labor issues.
The Bush/Cheney Big Blunder in Iraq has undone what the GOP hero Ronald Reagan accomplished when he worked to equalize the power struggle between Iran and Iraq during their 8-year war. Now Iran is the superpower among the Muslim nations of the Middle East thanks to the misguided efforts of the naive governor of Texas.
BAGHDAD - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday his landmark visit to Iraq opened a new chapter in "brotherly" relations between the two countries, which were once bitter enemies.
Ahmadinejad is the first Iranian president to visit Iraq. The trip not only highlights his country's growing influence on its Arab neighbor in the post-Saddam Hussein era, but it also serves as an act of defiance toward the U.S., which accuses Iran of training and giving weapons to Shiite extremists in Iraq.
All that the impotent Bush Administration can now do is to 'accuse' and 'threaten' Iran which snubs it nose at the United States. Foreign policy? Bomb and think, bomb and revise.
Russia votes in the mouthpiece of Putin. Putin, whose very soul the naive governor looked into down at the ranch, has ordered his nuclear bombers back to the skies and has tightened control of Russia in a dictatorial fashion. Russia, which is helping Iran with its nuclear programs, seems to be playing a very effective game of chess with the clueless governor.
MOSCOW - Russia's voters are expected to endorse Vladimir Putin's choice of a successor in Sunday's presidential election, allowing Putin to retain a measure of power in his nation, whose wealth and global voice have grown even as democratic freedoms diminished.
Dmitry Medvedev, a 42-year-old lawyer and loyal Kremlin aide, is expected to take over from Putin, whose eight years as president have left a deep imprint on the world's largest country. Medvedev has said he would offer Putin the prime minister's post.
Israel bombs the Palestinians. Oh, really? Again? What about that peace trip to the Middle East in November? After ignoring the Israel-Palestinian problem for 7 years, it looks like Mr. Bush's last minute effort to reclaim his legacy just blew up. I suppose the quote from Bush prior to the meeting is meaningless now: "I am looking forward to continuing our serious dialogue with you and the president of the Palestinian Authority to see whether or not peace is possible. I am optimistic. I know you are optimistic. And I thank you for your courage."
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Israeli aircraft sent missiles slamming into the office of the prime minister of Hamas-ruled Gaza before dawn on Sunday, pressing forward with an offensive that has killed nearly 70 Palestinians in two days of fighting. A 21-month-old girl was among the dead in new violence.
Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's office was empty at the time of Sunday's airstrike, but the raid was seen as a tough message to the Hamas leadership, which Israel holds responsible for repeated rocket barrages launched from Gaza.
Foreign policy? I'd laugh but the tears get in the way...
UPDATE 10:45 AM
Abbas breaks contact with Israel
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas suspends contacts with Israel in protest at a bloody assault on Gaza.
Ahmadinejad calls Iraq 'brotherly'
Russia votes for Putin's successor
Israeli aircraft target Hamas office
And these are just the international headlines. For now, we'll pass over the recession, mortgage crisis, the National Debt, inflation, and unequal distribution of wealth, trade, and labor issues.
The Bush/Cheney Big Blunder in Iraq has undone what the GOP hero Ronald Reagan accomplished when he worked to equalize the power struggle between Iran and Iraq during their 8-year war. Now Iran is the superpower among the Muslim nations of the Middle East thanks to the misguided efforts of the naive governor of Texas.
BAGHDAD - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday his landmark visit to Iraq opened a new chapter in "brotherly" relations between the two countries, which were once bitter enemies.
Ahmadinejad is the first Iranian president to visit Iraq. The trip not only highlights his country's growing influence on its Arab neighbor in the post-Saddam Hussein era, but it also serves as an act of defiance toward the U.S., which accuses Iran of training and giving weapons to Shiite extremists in Iraq.
All that the impotent Bush Administration can now do is to 'accuse' and 'threaten' Iran which snubs it nose at the United States. Foreign policy? Bomb and think, bomb and revise.
Russia votes in the mouthpiece of Putin. Putin, whose very soul the naive governor looked into down at the ranch, has ordered his nuclear bombers back to the skies and has tightened control of Russia in a dictatorial fashion. Russia, which is helping Iran with its nuclear programs, seems to be playing a very effective game of chess with the clueless governor.
MOSCOW - Russia's voters are expected to endorse Vladimir Putin's choice of a successor in Sunday's presidential election, allowing Putin to retain a measure of power in his nation, whose wealth and global voice have grown even as democratic freedoms diminished.
Dmitry Medvedev, a 42-year-old lawyer and loyal Kremlin aide, is expected to take over from Putin, whose eight years as president have left a deep imprint on the world's largest country. Medvedev has said he would offer Putin the prime minister's post.
Israel bombs the Palestinians. Oh, really? Again? What about that peace trip to the Middle East in November? After ignoring the Israel-Palestinian problem for 7 years, it looks like Mr. Bush's last minute effort to reclaim his legacy just blew up. I suppose the quote from Bush prior to the meeting is meaningless now: "I am looking forward to continuing our serious dialogue with you and the president of the Palestinian Authority to see whether or not peace is possible. I am optimistic. I know you are optimistic. And I thank you for your courage."
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Israeli aircraft sent missiles slamming into the office of the prime minister of Hamas-ruled Gaza before dawn on Sunday, pressing forward with an offensive that has killed nearly 70 Palestinians in two days of fighting. A 21-month-old girl was among the dead in new violence.
Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's office was empty at the time of Sunday's airstrike, but the raid was seen as a tough message to the Hamas leadership, which Israel holds responsible for repeated rocket barrages launched from Gaza.
Foreign policy? I'd laugh but the tears get in the way...
UPDATE 10:45 AM
Abbas breaks contact with Israel
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas suspends contacts with Israel in protest at a bloody assault on Gaza.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
White Men Key to 08 Election
Apparently white men in America hold the key to the White House in this 2008 election, so said CNN this morning. I guess it's back to the Founding Fathers once more: white men, the only citizens who could vote.
White men, on average, tend to be right-of-center or independent in their voting patterns. What would make them move to the left this voting cycle, away from McCain and towards Obama? I'm guessing three issues: war, economy, and security.
The war. It will have been nearly 6 full years of the War on Iraq by the time November 4, 2008 rolls around. Six years of a fitful engagement with 'the enemy.' That enemy has had a variety of faces and names over these years: Saddam Ba'athists, Sunni insurgents, Shia militia, Muqtada al-Sadr Army, unspecified 'foreign fighters' and al Qaeda. Some were 'against us' before they were 'with us.' The players are hard to define. So is the mission as well as the end game.
Men like to get the job done and dislike open-ended affairs. It is in our nature to finish one task and to move to another. I would imagine that disillusionment would be a good term to use to describe the white male view of the war right now. We were lied-to as well. Spun too. Hoodwinked. Men don't care to be fooled, especially where war is concerned.
The economy. White males are born with a certain privilege: gender and skin color. They expect doors to open for them, especially men born into upper middle class families. These days they are finding the doors shut. Not only that, but their wages are stagnant, oportunities for advancement limited. High medical premiums, record high energy prices, rising food prices have diluted their wages so that their total wealth has fallen, not risen, in the past 8 years: a real oddity for these men. They feel impotent to do much about it. White men do not like impotence.
Security. The attacks on 9-11 was a terrible psychological blow to the male psyche; the safety of the family is in his hands. The shock of that tragedy has warn thin. The knee-jerk response to seek revenge- quite the tribal instinct- has been vetted although not completely. Bin Laden is still on the loose. White men know now that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. Al-Qaeda is the issue and they, along with the Taleban, are increasing in numbers to pre-9-11 numbers. The War on Iraq has done nothing to stop this trend.
White men know that our homeland security has little to do with an invasion. Invasions of a foreign army are out of the picture. They understand that the next 'attack' will be some event inside the states- a terrorist event. The ricin scare in Nevada; the anthrax mailings in DC some years ago; that mysterious electrical black-out in Florida a few weeks ago. Men cannot protect their families from this and neither, it seems, can the government.
Economic security, in my opinion, has risen to the top of the white male agenda. The economic security of their own family is at risk; they are supposed to see to it that their children do better than themselves, just as their fathers did for them. It isn't working out so well. Many face home mortgage problems along with increasing credit debt. The dream of sending their children to college is fading. The hope of retirement security is dicey. Men don't like uncertainty; white men even less.
Thus, when white male voters watch the two candidates from now until November 4, they want to know how these candidates will address their concerns, their problems, their anxieties. Does John McCain have anything to offer besides 'wars and more wars?' Do white males want wars and more wars? Has that fear card turned out to be an empty bluff? Pure bull shit?
Which candidate will address the economic fiasco facing us? Will McCain's message of 'making the Bush tax cuts permanent' give the white male voter security? How will McCain's generous support of the military-industrial-complex be an advantage to the white male? When McCain said last month, "Things are tough now, but we're better off than in 2000," did that resonate with this voting bloc?
Right now, of course McCain is pandering to his conservative base, attempting to prove to them that he is one of them. Does this agenda appeal to the middle class white man? Many of these men thought that they voted for a 'compassionate conservative' in 2000. Is that what they got? How has the so-called conservative agenda made their lives richer, more secure?
Surely I am looking at this issue through the eyes of a left-of-center white male and my judgments here may be skewed, but I don't think I'm too far off of the mark. The middle class white male in America is not happy these days and another Bush-lite for 4 more years cannot be too appealing.
White men, on average, tend to be right-of-center or independent in their voting patterns. What would make them move to the left this voting cycle, away from McCain and towards Obama? I'm guessing three issues: war, economy, and security.
The war. It will have been nearly 6 full years of the War on Iraq by the time November 4, 2008 rolls around. Six years of a fitful engagement with 'the enemy.' That enemy has had a variety of faces and names over these years: Saddam Ba'athists, Sunni insurgents, Shia militia, Muqtada al-Sadr Army, unspecified 'foreign fighters' and al Qaeda. Some were 'against us' before they were 'with us.' The players are hard to define. So is the mission as well as the end game.
Men like to get the job done and dislike open-ended affairs. It is in our nature to finish one task and to move to another. I would imagine that disillusionment would be a good term to use to describe the white male view of the war right now. We were lied-to as well. Spun too. Hoodwinked. Men don't care to be fooled, especially where war is concerned.
The economy. White males are born with a certain privilege: gender and skin color. They expect doors to open for them, especially men born into upper middle class families. These days they are finding the doors shut. Not only that, but their wages are stagnant, oportunities for advancement limited. High medical premiums, record high energy prices, rising food prices have diluted their wages so that their total wealth has fallen, not risen, in the past 8 years: a real oddity for these men. They feel impotent to do much about it. White men do not like impotence.
Security. The attacks on 9-11 was a terrible psychological blow to the male psyche; the safety of the family is in his hands. The shock of that tragedy has warn thin. The knee-jerk response to seek revenge- quite the tribal instinct- has been vetted although not completely. Bin Laden is still on the loose. White men know now that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. Al-Qaeda is the issue and they, along with the Taleban, are increasing in numbers to pre-9-11 numbers. The War on Iraq has done nothing to stop this trend.
White men know that our homeland security has little to do with an invasion. Invasions of a foreign army are out of the picture. They understand that the next 'attack' will be some event inside the states- a terrorist event. The ricin scare in Nevada; the anthrax mailings in DC some years ago; that mysterious electrical black-out in Florida a few weeks ago. Men cannot protect their families from this and neither, it seems, can the government.
Economic security, in my opinion, has risen to the top of the white male agenda. The economic security of their own family is at risk; they are supposed to see to it that their children do better than themselves, just as their fathers did for them. It isn't working out so well. Many face home mortgage problems along with increasing credit debt. The dream of sending their children to college is fading. The hope of retirement security is dicey. Men don't like uncertainty; white men even less.
Thus, when white male voters watch the two candidates from now until November 4, they want to know how these candidates will address their concerns, their problems, their anxieties. Does John McCain have anything to offer besides 'wars and more wars?' Do white males want wars and more wars? Has that fear card turned out to be an empty bluff? Pure bull shit?
Which candidate will address the economic fiasco facing us? Will McCain's message of 'making the Bush tax cuts permanent' give the white male voter security? How will McCain's generous support of the military-industrial-complex be an advantage to the white male? When McCain said last month, "Things are tough now, but we're better off than in 2000," did that resonate with this voting bloc?
Right now, of course McCain is pandering to his conservative base, attempting to prove to them that he is one of them. Does this agenda appeal to the middle class white man? Many of these men thought that they voted for a 'compassionate conservative' in 2000. Is that what they got? How has the so-called conservative agenda made their lives richer, more secure?
Surely I am looking at this issue through the eyes of a left-of-center white male and my judgments here may be skewed, but I don't think I'm too far off of the mark. The middle class white male in America is not happy these days and another Bush-lite for 4 more years cannot be too appealing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
