Like Billy Idol - I'm Just Dancing with Myself

Well, okay. I guess I am just talking to myself here. The only comment I received about Barack's studmuffin status came from...ME.

Depressing.

The friggin Iowa caucus is just over a month away. And, once again, it looks like we are going to get the kind of leadership we deserve. Entrenched politicians indebted to PACs and lobbyists. Fuck it. I'll do what I can and I'll can what I can't.

If you don't wanna get onboard the Audacity of Hope bandwagon, I hope you have at least thought through the whole scenario as clearly, critically and intelligently as possible. Right now, Obama still has a better chance of beating any of the Repug candidates than does Hillary - if you look at the polls. She just can't get enough "Reagan Dems" and independent voters on her side...and it is my belief that she never will.

And even if she somehow manged to win the White House, no clear-thinking person believes a) She will bring about the kind of somewhat radical change that Obama would at least try to, or that b) She would be able to bridge the divisiveness and vitrol that exists in Washington - and throughout the nation. (This isn't a nation of red states and blue states, said Obama, this is the United States.) We have serious issues - internationally and domestically - that are going to require someone who is able to get more than 52% of the people to rally behind them. That ain't Hillary. Obama might be able to do that.

That said, I am hopping on the Obama bus - literally - one of these Saturdays in the next month to head to Iowa and canvas for Barack. His voters tend to be younger and less experienced (but more educated) than Hillary's. Therefore, the big concern is they don't realize that on Jan. 3, it isn't just a matter of going to a booth and pulling a lever. They may have to spend many hours engaged in debtes and discussions:

On caucus night, Iowans gather by party preference to elect delegates to the 99 county conventions. Democratic candidates must receive at least 15 percent of the votes in that precinct to move on to the county convention. If a candidate receives less than 15 percent of the votes, supporters of non-viable candidates have the option to join a viable candidate group, join another non-viable candidate group to become viable, join other groups to form an uncommitted group or chose to go nowhere and not be counted. Non-viable groups have up to 30 minutes to realign, if they fail to do so in that time, they can ask the for more time, which is voted on by the caucus as a whole. If the caucus refuses, re-alignment is done and delegates are awarded.

So, the Obama camp really needs volunteers to devote a Saturday to hopping onboard a bus and spending 4 hours walking around telling people why they should vote for Barack and explaining the process...in the hope that they will actually follow-through on caucus day.

All aboard the Audacity of Hope bus...all yea who still dare to hope for something better.

OUT

Baraka Studmuffin

Well, I can't say this very often about political candidates: The more I learn about Obama, the more I respect, admire, and wish to work for him. The last time this happened was in 1992, when I worked for "Governor Moonbeam's" presidential campaign.

(When Jerry Brown announced his intention to run for president against President George H.W. Bush, many in the media and his own party dismissed his campaign as an ego-trip with little chance of gaining significant support. Ignoring them, Brown embarked on an ultra-grassroots campaign to, in his words, "take back America from the confederacy of corruption, careerism, and campaign consulting in Washington." To the surprise of many, Brown was able to tap a populist streak in the Democratic Party, a feat that many would later see as the precursor to the 2004 presidential campaign of Governor Howard Dean. Amazingly, if not for a major gaffe late in the campaign, he just might have pulled off getting the nomoination - despite only accepting $100 donations from individuals!)

But I digress. I'd like for you to read this article from Slate. I am aware that people are busy and Americans don't like to read all that much (although I suspect the devotees to Hopeful Curmudgeon are way above the norm in this category). So, forgive my skepticism, but I'll Cliff's Note it for you.

The article is titled "In Defense of Obama's Patriotism." It addresses the fact that there is a misleading email making the rounds. Containing the above photo, the email text says that Obama refused to hold his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. It is actually from a video in which the national anthem is playing. (Not a whole lot of difference, probably, to those who cheer a vacuous and cheap version of name-brand patriotism.) Either way, Obama actually was breaking a law when he did not place his hand over his heart. This might make interesting fodder for a future post, but for now, I'm focusing on what this says about Obama.

What this lack of symbolism represents, I think, is a helluva lot - at least, symbolically. Do you know that Obama also has made the decision not to wear the American flag lapel pin? If you aren't a political geek, you may not know that virtually every politician started wearing those things on Sept. 12, 2001. Obama spoke for many of us, I think, when he explained he isn't wearing the pin because he believes it has become a cheap substitute for true patriotism.

The author of the article, Ron Rosenbaum, asks (rhetorically) whether others feel the way he does: grateful to be an American but increasingly uncomfortable about the compulsory rituals of flag-worship other forms of peer-pressure...like putting your hand on your heart and standing to face the flag during the national anthem when all you really wanted to do was watch a good ol' American baseball game with a few friends?

There may or may not be a conscious pattern to Obama's resistance to lip-service patriotism. But given how carefully most politician's "images" are cultivated, (epsecially at the national presidential level) I have to believe he is speaking to those of us who feel the same way. It may be naive of him to think he can get away with this - but it may also be true that he is willing to go only so far in selling his soul. And, it just might be true that his audacity of hope extends to the American electorate - a hope that we will elect someone who doesn't just say what we want to hear, but what we need to hear.

He told a group of American auto workers in Detroit that he would push to increase MPG standards - 4% a year. That huge union ended up not endorsing him. He has told similar truths in front of farmers (about subsidies) as well as senior citizens (about Social Security). Is Obama perhaps giving us, the American electorate, the benefit of the doubt...is he testing us to see if we are in fact ready for someone different? Someone who will not just conduct politics as usual? Someone who will not only lead us in a different direction, but who will actually tell us the truth?

And if we aren't ready for that, well then, perhaps he doesn't want to lead us...yet?

Maybe.

And if so: What a stud.

Dr. Fool, Ape-arms and the Political Pendulum

Earth, Milky Way Galaxy --

My family keeps thinking I will become more conservative - more like them - as I get older. Well, perhaps I wear my political black-sheep-ness a bit too proudly, like a baa...baa...badge. The more they speak of such absurdity, the more left I lean.

Family dynamics and their psychological influences are downright Joycean in their complexity. Hell, there are entire industries based on them: Psychology and psychotherapy and psychopharmacy...not to mention all the Dr. Fool/self-help/codependent-TV-and-book markets. Many people spend an hour a week for the bulk of their adult lives on the proverbial couch trying to unravel such labyrinthian mysteries.

So, I am not going there. The point of bringing this up is to acknowledge the fact that my liberal beer belly just keeps expanding, despite my daily regimen of feasting on the anarchist's cookbook...and I don't really know WHY.

I guess if I had to wager on the biggest influence, I'd lay that thorny crown soundly upon Baby King George's ugly southern-fried cokehead. (And I'd do it with all the power my skinny ape arms could muster.) If the past 7 years haven't made you lurch at least a little leftward, there are too many droppings in your squirrel cage. Clean the fucker out!

I think most people are feeling this way right now... a friend told me this week that she was ready to try socialism. For some reason, I was reminded of a political philosophy I first heard about during the golden years of Clinton:"Communitarianism." I prefer to oversimplify rather than lull you to sleep: The philosophy contends that liberalism (the true definition - not some hijacked Lush Rimblah version) places too much focus on individual rights - to the point that it is (often) detrimental to the greater good. It is not hostile to liberalism; rather, communitarians prefer shifting toward a greater focus on community and society, rather than always emphasizing individual rights as being of utmost importance.

This philosophy is already influential...consider such notions as imminent domain. I suppose the most rudimentary example is the repression of free speech: no jokes about bombs or guns are allowed in an airport. No yelling "fire" (at least, if there isn't one) in a theatre. Etc.

For the environmental movement to succeed, societies will have to embrace some aspects of communitarianism. It will necessarily involve limiting people's (and companies') choices.

Like it or not, the same principle is behind Congress' approval of allowing wire-tapping on American citizens...or waiving the writ of habeas corpus.

Given the crumbling state of the states, the so-called Union, and - literally - the world, I am ready, willing and enthusiastic for a serious shake-up. There is a popular axiom about how the pendulum has to swing too far in the other direction in order to counter imbalances once things get out of whack.

Well, shit is whack alright. The pendulum on the American timepiece is gonna have to do a full 180 after George the Chimp is finally thrown from the tree. Either that or it will quickly cease to function. Not to be too Chicken Little about it, but shit! we seem to be running out of time.

I doubt most Americans have the cajones for it (not yet), but I say: apportez sur la révolution...

...or at least gimme Obama for 4 to 8 years. Por favor?

Is 32 years of a Bush-Clinton White House Really a Democracy?

What the hell is wrong with the American people? Counting the two terms that Bush senior served as V.P. - if Hillary is elected President - we are guaranteed at least 32 years of a Bush or Clinton in the White House! Is this the country that brought modern democratic principles to the world, or a friggin' aristocracy?

Look, if the Dems end up nominating Hillary, I will (almost) certainly have to vote for her. (Know this, though: I'd prefer Ron Paul over continuing this abhorrent rut we are in.) But let's not candy-coat a poopscicle, okay? She is the pure embodiment of an entrenched politician, albeit a female. Although it may not necessarily be her fault, she will perpetuate the divisiveness preventing us from solving our most serious problems. We really need someone who can, and will, break through this 51/49, Red versus Blue bullshit. And if you think Hillary Clinton is the woMan, you are delusional.

Edwards had plenty of promise...until he built a 30,000 sq. foot home. For a family of 4. The year before running for President. On a "Let's Help the Poor" platform. (Even if you dismiss the hypocrisy, the timing shows a serious lack of good judgement.) Oh, and did I mention that he railed against predatory lending, then went to work for one of the worst perpetraitors of such practices? Or that he went off on the rich for using off-shore accounts to avoid taxes, then did it himself? Or that he voted for "No Child Left Behind," and then spent years bashing Bush for the law. The Iraq debacle and the Patriot Act? He voted for them.

The John McCain of 2000 seemed like a decent man. That dude is gone-daddy-gone.

Of the remaining serious candidates who should be considered, that leaves us with Obama. Entrenched politician? No. (Not yet.) Does he seem to have the ability to unite a nation? Yes...he has the oratory skills, the ideas, the charisma and the ability to think critically. He has the best chance of bringing the nation together in a way we haven't been for a long, long time. His ideas for education, for helping the poor, protecting the environment, and his foreign policies all look promising. (The healthcare issue might have to be tackled in bits and pieces - maybe he is hoping to eat that monster a small piece at a time?)

Anyway, the Hopeful Curmudgeon is officially endorsing Barack Obama. And I am sure that means the world to him!

www.barackobama.com

CM