Jack & Jill Politics

Comedian George Carlin Passed Away

Obama Moves to Reintroduce Himself to Voters

R.I.P. Zimbabwe

Utterly Hilarious post on The Field Negro:

The Negro Review Board

Obama strategists believe they have identified a gold mine of new and potentially decisive Democratic voters in at least five battleground states — voters who failed to turn out in the past but can be mobilized this time because Obama’s candidacy is historic and his cash-rich campaign can afford the costly task of identifying and motivating such supporters.

In Florida alone, more than half a million black registered voters stayed home in 2004. Hundreds of thousands more African Americans are eligible to vote but not registered. And campaign analysts have identified similar potential in North Carolina, Virginia, Missouri and Ohio.

Barack Obama’s campaign strategists are quietly laying plans to draw African American voters to the polls in unprecedented numbers by capitalizing on the excitement over the prospect of electing the nation’s first black president.

Every “interest group,” for lack of a better phrase, in the nation is becoming disillusioned with Barack.

Obama Walks a Fine Line With Muslims

I guess people really did think he was some kind of messiah.

The Clintons dropped this email campaign against Barack a long time ago and he’s been defending himself ever since.

And only now his supporters, even those who phonebanked for him, are taking notice?

Maybe Barack will give that speech on faith I suggested sometime before the election after all.

Hubris

Is another split emerging in the Democratic Party? No wonder that the DNC has been moved to the safety of Obama’s Chicago headquarters! Humble Low and Ignorant Insane swamp hermit me didn’t realize that there were actually two (or more?) forms of communism!?! Apparently there is – 1) the “sectarian and authoritarian” Maoists’ form…2) the “Russian style bureaucratic” Marxists’ (?) form.

With less than five months left, before the US Presidential election, the infamous ‘Chicago Political Machine’ is trying to keep Obama’s hidden “baggage” out of sight and out of mind…so to speak especially of the well “hidden” Obama/Ayers connection.

Who “sent” Obama?

That article is by Steve Diamond…a lefty. Is he a Marxist? I don’t know, but he certainly offers a lot of info about the Maoist Bill Ayers, and points to a Obama/Ayers connection. Remember when Obama was asked about his connection to Bill Ayers, and he replied that Ayers was just – “some guy who lives in my neighborhood.”? Here’s another article by Steve, a new one:

That “Guy Who Lives in My Neighborhood”: Behind the Ayers-Obama Relationship

We all know that our public school systems were taken over by Communism decades ago, for the purpose of molding the minds of America’s children…heck; Hillary published some kids’ book named It Takes a Village, and Americans paid no attention to its communist meanings. Looks like Hillary was the Marxist and Obama is the Maoist…

@Craig Hickman –

Barack Obama has already given a major speech on faith. In fact, he was roundly criticized by liberals and other Democrats when he did.

Call to Renewal Keynote Address – June 28, 2006

Didn’t know if you saw it. A petition has started regarding the R. Kelly verdict.

Full details (and badge) from a post I just put up.

10,000 Signatures for R. Kelly petition

Thanks,
Fredric

d.,

No, everyone didn’t.

Good link, D. @ 8:58.

A lot of focus has been put on Obama’s Rev. Wright connection, but I think that it is the Ayers connection that is going to hurt Obama the most.

I never read “Unfit for Command”, since the internet offered plenty in Kerry’s own words, e.g. his decision to apply for patrol crafts like JFK’s PT-109…applied for them just before they were moved from patrolling the seas to patrolling the inland waters, i.e. marsh areas and rivers.

Kerry tried to hide the facts, just like Obama is doing. Apparently David Freddoso is going to do some more digging into Obama’s relationships with Mayor Richard M. Daley, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the terrorist Bill Ayers.

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an “unfortunate event,” says Black. “But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.” As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,” says Black.

::

So, according to the honorable Charlie Black, assassinations of world leaders and terrorist attacks on US soil are good politics?

Hmmm…..

But if the “war on terror” has been so successful because, well, you know, we haven’t been attacked on US soil since, well, you know, 9/11, how could another terrorist attack under our noses benefit the rulers of the status quo?

I mean: really.

That would mean our government failed to keep us safe. And since we’re so, well, you know, afraid, why on earth would we trust a government that failed to keep us safe.

Twice.

And this time, it couldn’t be blamed on Bill Clinton, because, well, you know, he hasn’t been around in a while now.

So, Black seems to be suggesting in his brazen admission that a terrorist attack would be good for McCain’s prospect is that terrorist attacks on US soil make us so, well, you know, terrorized, that we’d prefer another president who is, well, you know, a warmonger.

That’s pure bullshit.

Or, it’s an announcement of something so sinister, Black doesn’t even realize he spilled the beans.

If we fall for this bullshit three times in a row, then, well, you know, we will deserve every single blister that busts our skin from the fires in the deepest rung in hell.

Some of my thoughts about Barack Obama, disillusionment and white progressives in particular:

I think some of the people who are “disillusioned” now just didn’t do their homework. I have seen this over and over in this society — the ease with which people don’t bother to work to deeply understand what is going on, and instead quickly map their own understanding onto situations without checking to see what is accurate.

So for example, Senator Obama talks about “change” and many people don’t bother to attend to what that might actually mean when he says that. Don’t bother to read his books, watch his actions closely, look for patterns, deeply and seriously ask what he really means by that — and what he doesn’t.

Instead, in these situations, whatever “change” means to whoever hears it becomes the standard that person/group uses to assess him. And when he doesn’t live up to what they mapped onto him, they feel betrayed.

Initially, for example, I feel he was functioning for some white people as a “Magical Negro” — and this IMO is coming up again with white progressives acting like he is supposed to Save The Day Immediately now that he is the nominee and if he does not then he is a sell-out. (I think there are other patterns too for this group, related to him not being white, but those are harder for me to articulate right now).

[note: I almost deleted the above paragraph but am leaving it in even though I am not sure it is a good idea]

So anyway. What does he mean, really mean by change? The link I posted yesterday — Tone, Truth, and the Democratic Party, by Barack Obama, Sep 30, 2005 — says something about it, I think, as do the two books he wrote and his comments and actions in various places.

IMO his “change” is at least partly about the categories he operates in and wants the country to shift into — and the implications of those categories (which are substantial IMO) for action and interaction. The problem is those categories don’t actually exist in the worldview of those white progressives I mentioned above.

So there is a struggle in which many membes of this group are furious at Senator Obama for not being what they, in their privilege, decided he is and should be, based on their categories and their landscapes and their expectations.

And not only that, but the actual concept of sorting into different categories isn’t something that people in this particular group comprehend. In this case with the white progressives my assessment is it’s a matter of privilege. They have had the luxury of assuming their assumptions and categories are THE categories and assumptions.

So this problem I am writing about here just plain doesn’t exist, in their pespective. Hard to deal with a problem when your worldview doesn’t allow for its existence.

For example: White progressives tend to define politics in terms of Good Guys Versus Bad Guys. This is something I have not only observed in my life but ten years ago documented in one white progressive context as part of a formal research project. One part of this pattern is that the white progressive sense of “we” is fed by the good fight against the Bad Guys — this is where the animating energy for action comes from.

Senator Obama is, if I understand correctly, working from a different set of categories that would see the above set-up as not particularly effective for getting things done.

In working from his own categories, he is basically denying the white progressives their “fix” of animating energy. I feel that this group is pushing back against him partly for this reason. They gut-level fear the kind of change he is about, because it would take away the familiar of how they experience things and the energy that feeds them.

But since they are also mapping their own projections onto him, they aren’t looking at this pattern — instead they define him again in their terms, this time as potentially one of the Bad Guys, and get their energy-fix back, for now at least.

From ABC’s Jeff Tapper:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/rove-obamas-the.html#comments

“Rove: Obama’s the Guy at the Country Club Holding a Martini Making Snide Comments About Everyone Else”

ABC News’ Christianne Klein reports that at a breakfast with Republican insiders at the Capitol Hill Club this morning, former White House senior aide Karl Rove referred to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, as “coolly arrogant.”

“Even if you never met him, you know this guy,” Rove said, per Christianne Klein. “He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.”

Rove said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., “needs to come right at him.” He referred to the latest Newsweek poll showing Obama with a 15-point lead over McCain as nonsense, though he used a more scatological synonym. Rove said he was heading over to the White House for lunch and a chat with the President, Klein reports

Obama Camp Drops Familiar ‘Presidential Seal’

…But another campaign source told The Atlantic.com that the campaign decided to stop using the logo because it didn’t want to give the press a reason to label Obama arrogant.

And, people actually plan on voting for this arrogant moron.

hearts and flowers . . .

We all have our opinions and the right to express them but isn’t there a point where we need to disengage instead of continually raising the stakes?

yes. there is. so i’ll not be back here again. y’all have fun with your great new president come fall.

Craig

I’m glad black showed their hands, now those who were unsure that McCain was a crazed warmonger that does not value human life no longer have to wonder.

And his campaign says Obama just wants to win.

If A&P (Axelrod and Plouffe) had said what Black said..

It would be leading every newscast. There would be a segment leading off every show on every cable channel. And, it would be the headline scrolled every 3rd one.

Sweet — and sour — home Chicago

rikyrah,

If A&P had said what Black said, Hillary would be the nominee by Friday.

Barack’s political career would be over.

ms.martin,

What more can be said? This ought to be causing the Republicans to reconsider their nominee, but it probably won’t even register.