Powered by Bravenet Bravenet Blog

Monday, September 29th 2008

5:27 PM

THIRTY SIX DAYS AND COUNTING

We have thirty six days before the election on November 4, 2008.   Believe it or not, things are going to become even more intense.  McCain is a win at all cost kind of guy.  Frank Rich, in a New York Times Op-Ed, wrote: What we learned last week is that the man  who always puts his “country first” will take the country down with him if that’s what it takes to get to the White House.  You can expect the level of distractions to intensify, especially over the next few weeks.  John McCain will continue to be even more erratic -- hath's his definition of being a maverick -- and will pull out the stops on game-playing and other shenanigans.   We must stop reacting to the distractions and start responding.
 
The "stopping of his campaign" did not accomplish what McCain intended.  He was not embraced by his fellow Republicans when he finally made it back to Washington on Friday, it appeared that most were apathetic at best,. about his return.  It really seemed that McCain was in the way.  Not one of his peers is following his claim to being the Superman of the buyout plan except for his camp.  But many, myself included, believe that his real goal was to get Friday night's debate postponed until next week, which would have eliminated the vice presidential debate.   Palin, was someone he gambled on and right now, he's losing. I do not believe in polls, however her favorability has dropped to -10.   But Barack Obama put a line in the sand by going down to Mississippi for the debate, and McCain had no choice but to follow him.   And what about his so-called key role in crafting the economic bailout plan?  Apparently he phoned it in from a posh DC restaurant where he spent Saturday evening with his friend Senator Lieberman and their wives?  How about the reality that he had not even read the initial plan on Wednesday, before he made the dramatic (erratic) decision to stop campaigning.  Which never actually happened.  His surrogates and ads were still going strong. For those of you who became annoyed with McCain's repeated use of the phrase "He just doesn't understand."  one on his overzealous aides admitted on live television that they had actually practiced the use of that phrase in hopes that it would translate to viewers that Barack Obama is naive and doesn't have enough experience.  Instead it played to viewers as McCain being condescending and that was just annoying.
Update: 

The bailout plan did not pass.  Blaming and finger pointing  is in full tilt, with the Republicans blaming the Democrats and Democrats blaming Republicans.  It was a failure that all of them share blame in.  There were some processes and too much talking by the Congressional leadership and they should have listened to Barack Obama because the plan is not specific enough about the limits on executive payouts and on what help will be offered the middle class homeowners.   But the biggest loser of all is John McCain.  After spending the last five days claiming leadership and victory in his so-called role in the crafting and passing of this bill.  We need to clearly understand how much damage McCain actually did in this critical and delicate process.   When you go and vote, forget race, forget gender, remember what will happen with an erratic, short-tempered, stubborn man, with a questionable and incompetent running mate in the White House.

So what should we expect this week?  Palin is now on the bubble.  The "leak" from the McCain camp is that Palin is not easy to prepare, not doing well, etc.  Don't buy into the drama.     Glenn Greenwald, writer for Salon, said it best:  She is either (a) completely ignorant about the most basic political issues -- a vacant, ill-informed, incurious know-nothing, or (b) aggressively concealing her actual beliefs about these matters because she's petrified of deviating from the simple-minded campaign talking points she's been fed and/or because her actual beliefs are so politically unpalatable, even when taking into account the right-wing extremism that is permitted, even rewarded, in our mainstream. I'm not really sure which is worse, but it doesn't really matter, because with 40 days left before the election, both options are heinous. 
 Palin is either as bad as she looks or she is playing a deadly game with the minds of Americans.  Could she possibly be pretending to be the "dumb blonde"  with a plan to theatrically unveil the new Sarah Palin -- a very, knowledgeable  woman -- on the night of the vice presidential debate.  And if that's the case, we need to be very afraid of any person, any people who would go to that much effort to manipulate you and me. So don't get too excited if Sarah suddenly puts a coherent sentence together.  You see, she just did not look too upset after the Couric interview, which was an absolute disaster. 
 
The POW Story
I have heard McCain's POW/hero story used as both an asset and an excuse for whatever he chooses to use it for.  But I am still curious as to what exactly, makes him a hero.  My understanding is that he would not have been caught had he been following the command to fly at a higher altitude.   That aside, there is a video on You Tube that you should see for yourself.  Watch and decide for yourself about McCain's much-touted heroism. Is he just good at telling a war story?
 
 
The McCain camp is also flying the trial balloon to determine whether they can use the shotgun wedding of Palin's daughter as a pre-election bump opportunity.  Didn't they just say that the daughter's pregnancy was a private matter?  It sounds like further exploitation of the family to me.  They are not, by any means, Camelot. This is yet another distraction.
 
I have a new video on YouTube, this one is about McCain's problems.
 
 
  
Each One Take One
Remind friends and family to remind others that the deadline for voter registration is this week.Get one person registered this week.  I like Mon'ique's take on those who aren't voting: If you won't vote, then shut up.
Every single vote will count this election.
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Saturday, September 27th 2008

10:06 AM

This Presidential Election, Conduct Your Own Interview

 (c)2008 John G. Moore, Indianapolis animator, cartoonist and creator of SPuN a web-comic for CBS Sportsline, 2006-07 

Look for the new video, PALIN II on YOU TUBE next week!

A picture is worth a thousand words. I asked my friend, John G. Moore Jr., to create this cartoon for me and as you can see he nailed it.  In the near future I will be doing a comparison of the leadership styles of Palin and Cheney. 

McCain is running a campaign fraught with distractions, all of which have nothing to do with the economic crisis nor, for that matter, anyhing to do with any of the issues that affect me. Combine that with the incredibly telling -- and embarrassing -- interview Palin performed with Couric: Palin was so awful I was embarrassed for her. She sounded like a schoolgirl who crammed for an oral test the night before after having never opened the textbook all semester. The honeymoon is clearly over and more people are saying she is not the one -- even Mrs. Bush is saying she is not ready. .And yet...people are still planning to vote for McCain even though his erratic behavior, his temper, and complete lack of direction concerning the economy is clearly evident-- I told someone that his early departure from the White House meeting on Thursday was quite telling. He hadn't even read the proposal before he went marching off to Washington purportedly to save the day, although most -- even his own peers -- thought he was grandstanding. There is nothing I have yet to hear or see that shows me any significant experience he's had in foreign affairs, and living next door to Russia is not experience. BTW, the "compliment" about Palin's beauty by Pakistan's leader was not a compliment -- she needs to get a clue.

Ask yourself:  If Barack Obama, had graduated from the bottom of his class, or attended five schools in six years instead of graduating from the top of his class at Harvard, If Barack Obama had been involved in a banking scandal (Keating Five), or had his running mate accused of abusing governmental power and lying about it, OR if Barack Obama had a hair-trigger temper that has been publicly and privately witnessed in both stressful and non-stressful situations or publicly called his wife obscene names, would we even consider voting for him?  Forget Race.  Forget Gender.  Conduct your own job interview and hire the one most qualified to put the USA on the right course. 

NOTE: The GOP ia now looking to a fairly obsolete law to keep you from voting.  It is a law that is subject to interpretation.  I got two e-mails about it today and found that it was verified on Snopes.com.  It is a law about what they call "passive electioneering."   It's a law that is so unspecific that it is subject to even local interpretation, which is why it's a problem for us all.  Read the specifics by clicking here and tell everyone you know to wear NOTHING that has writing or images on it of anything -- including sports logos, even your cap and even if it's  your company work clothes, when you go to vote. 

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Monday, September 15th 2008

4:57 AM

Sarah Palin: Not the Right Choice nor the Right Voice for Every Woman

Finally, the media has gained enough courage to provide some true insight into who Sarah Palin really is, as the New York Times released a front page article this past Saturday, on the real Sarah Palin as a governor, mayor and her character as a person.  As women across the country begin to realize that  just any woman is not good enough to represent us in the White House, and that every woman in the public eye does not speak for you or me as individuals, I think back to the ongoing myth that was perpetuated during the primaries where the African American vote for Barack Obama was dismissed as being an emotional choice, when, in fact, most seem to forget that many did not vote for Jesse Jackson because he was not the right choice for the White House and he does not -- to this day -- speak for every African American.  I think that we are all getting the point; as Women, as African Americans, as people period, that we all need to focus on who will get us back on track as a country, who will not take us into war without valid reason, who is focused on the best interests of this country versus winning at all cost.   And, for me, it is not the McCain/Palin ticket.   For more information on women who are not for Sarah Palin, visit http://womenagainstsarahpalin.blogspot.com/  Also, visit You Tube for my Video Commentary on the Presidential race.
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Wednesday, September 10th 2008

6:36 AM

When Did The Media Become A Precursor To State-Run News?

Beauty often seduces us on the road to truth.  How ironic to be watching a 2004 rerun of a House episode tonight and hear this particular line.  When did this presidential race become the Republican tail wagging the dog with the media?  McCain flips off CNN because Campbell Brown asks legitimate  questions about Palin, he complains and two members of the political coverage team are removed, he dictates what can and cannot be asked on the Palin plane, and What? Associated Press isn't invited to the party at all.  Now this non-story about poor Sarah not being able to control the Oprah Winfrey show. Last I checked, Oprah owns the show and had already said, back in 2007, that she wasn't interviewing ANY candidate until after the election.   

And poor Sarah, who was interviewed by Charles Gibson tonight. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/11/sarah-palins-charlie-gibs_n_125772.html) She had no idea as to what she was talking about, which is why they have been shutting out direct interviews.  Even though Gibson attempted to assist her, nothing could cover her total lack of knowledge and my question is how would any person feel safe with her answering that 3 a.m. call?  A clueless Trojan horse and the danger is she actually believes that she is fully capable of being President.  Scary.

If they are in the White House will all media become government run?  No wait, that's in countries with dictatorships, right?  I suggest that the media is not yet state run, so until it is, I'd ask that media get some guts and do some comprehensive unbiased investigative reporting.  Because methinks he protesteth too much.  And as long as the media is put off balance, no one will have a chance to find out who Palin is without her script.  If Palin's rather strange commentary from the pulpit of her church is any indication of  what we should expect, I can understand.why they want to keep her as far as possible from a microphone.  But the comments by her pastor are just not being looped over and over again on CNN (http://maxblumenthal.com/2008/09/palins-pastor-god-is-gonna-strike-out-his-hand-against america/)  Or that her husband definitely and Palin herself allegedly, were/are members of the group attempting to secede Alaska from the United States (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks4-2008sep04,0,5675222.column). Palin is the modern day Trojan Horse. She is not the nice girl who needs a collective Superman who must save her from the mean people and the big bad black man. (Yes, Elisabeth, Whoopi was absolutely right, and your tantrums don't change the truth.)(http://community.tvguide.com/thread/View/Elizabeth-New-Tv/800035274&start=15.) Palin was brought in for a purpose.  To be divisive and turn your attention from where McCain and Obama actually stand on the issues.  .Think about it, other than her ability to regurgitate the same old myths, allegations and untruths as though by her making the statements, they suddenly become the valid and credible.  This so-called Hockey Mom  has some questionable ideas about the environment, about ethics, about power about our rights as women and as citizens. (http://divasblueoasis.blogspot.com/2008/09/alaskan-loyaltyand-fear-of-retribution.html)  Control of the media is just a start.   Perhaps McCain has taken a page out of the Mao-Tse Tung playbook: "He who controls images, controls minds; and he who controls minds has little, if anything, to worry about from bodies."  Um, McCain, what is your position on education again?

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Monday, September 8th 2008

1:17 PM

Presidential Politics and the Psychological Rape of the American People

  
I spent way too much time on the Internet in the last twenty four hours. I kept finding interesting articles, commentary and some fascinating points of view about McCain, Obama, Palin, even a few about Biden. One was the Blog of an African American Republican, but I will get to him in a moment. I had one reoccurring thought: American citizens are becoming mentally affected by this particular political race. More than once I noted comments from various people, diverse in race and gender, who feel that people are getting into an out of control frenzy. A round about way of saying folks are going a little insane over the Presidential race. Personally, I think we all need to take a breath, stop reacting and start responding. Because there are less than two months until we finally have this election. And I am tired. Aren't you tired?
Now, even more trash talk, innuendo and nonsense is coming out of people who are in positions that should command respect, yet they are acting disrespectful. Clearly, the GOP, seemingly short on real issue-related counterpoints, has taken to the strategy defined in the philosophy of Mao Tse-Tung: "He who controls images, controls minds; and he who controls minds has little, if anything, to worry about from bodies." To counteract this thinking, this strategy, again I say, we must stop reacting and start responding.
We still have the ongoing attempts to affix labels to Barack Obama, even when those labels are proven to be lies; there are those who continue to label Senator Obama as an elitist, which is the new covert definition for " you don't know your place ." a pre-civil rights point of view defining a subservient plantation mentality; our racial glass ceiling if you will. Suggesting that Barack Obama is an angry Black man, when in fact a new story just broke this weekend about McCain, his well documented temper and the pushing of a POW's relative, who was in a wheelchair, in the corridor of the Senator's office in 1996 ( http://www.huffingtonpost. com/2008/09/07/report-mccain-pushed-w oma_n_124615.html).
Why the need to label? Because they are banking on our never directly addressing the elephant in the room: Roland Martin on his radio talk show last week, had a call from an Anglo female who did not want to vote for McCain/Palin, yet could not vote for Barack Obama. Martin asked her to define her position on the issues. Her positions were the direct opposite of McCain's. When asked what was holding her back, she could not articulate why she could not vote for Obama; Martin finally said, "Say it, just say it." But she could not say it, she could not acknowledge the elephant that is in the national room. Race. We have been silenced by the pundits, by the Republicans, by anyone who is afraid to look in the mirror of this reality, who chide us about the notion of playing the race card, when they've had the full deck on the table all along. We dance about it, afraid to look it in the eye and see it for what it is. Fear of offending, fear of acknowledging, fear of needing to change our paradigms. The strategy is to feed that fear.
McCain effectively silenced the media by creating a perception, fueled by Laura Bush's warning to Democrats concerning sexist comments 
(www.news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080901/pl_politico/20378 ).  Suddenly every question asked about Palin became sexist and offensive.  By using reverse psychology, McCain successful kept all legitimate questions at bay ,including the smokescreen raised with his cancellation of the Larry King Live interview -- purportedly because Campbell Brown asked a Republican surrogate a question he couldn't answer --  while attempting to minimize the swirl of drama and potentially damaging effects as more information about who the real Sarah Palin is continues to bubble up. As I write, MSNBC has shaken up its evening line of commentators as a direct result of a formal complaint from the McCain camp -- because MSNBC announced the Palin selection before it was official: The McCain campaign has filed letters of complaint to the news division about its coverage and openly tied MSNBC to it. Tension between the network and the campaign hit an apex the day Mr. McCain announced Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. MSNBC had reported Friday morning that Ms. Palin’s plane was enroute to the announcement and she was likely the pick. But McCain campaign officials warned the network off, with one official going so far as to say that all of the candidates on the short list were on their way — which MSNBC then reported.  (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1)
 Because, the McCain campaign complained that Matthews and Olbermann were pro-Democrat, both have been removed from their anchor seats and will serve as a psychological cautionary tale for every news anchor or pundit who wants to keep his or her job. ).
So how is it possible? How can one group of people continue to hurl one label after another at someone whose views and visions do not match their's -- hoping at least one would eventually stick -- and yet, at the same time, minimize( http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2 008/09/palin-nonissue-47345-alaskan-i .html), , trivialize, ( http://max b lumenthal.com/2008/09/pali ns-pastor-god-is-gonna-strike-out-his-hand-a gainst america / ) even make disappear ( http://www.huffingt onpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-lawyer-s tonewallin_n_123179.html) similar or worse allegations that are actually the truth? If the very same issues were uncovered in the Obama/Biden house, there would be an outcry, a demand for justice, and " see, I told you he was to be feared " high fives among those who choose not to see past their ingrained paradigms.
Character, in and of itself is not easily changed at any age. John McCain is seventy two years old. One important point that people seem to forget is that it is virtually impossible for a leopard to change his spots once he or she get past a certain point in life. McCain is who he is, and change is an empty promise from him. He has made, what may soon be determined, a potentially dangerous choice in Palin as his running mate. Yes, the matters of her daughter's pregnancy, even the alleged extra-marital affair are family matters and non-issues in direct context. But the exploitation of Palin's family to create the desired perception is not. You, see I don't care about the family issues, except as it goes to uncovering her character. Character is as important to know, http://www.andrys.com/palin-k ilkenny.html, as is the rest of the resume she brings to the table. What if you where hiring someone to fill a top positionWhat if you where hiring someone to fill a top position. In the interview, you asked them numerous questions and were told that those questions were non-issues, even though they defined the candidate's ability to do the job. Suppose you asked a question that you already knew the answer to -- because you did your homework -- and the response was a lie by omission. A lie by omission is deceit. Would you then hire that person for the job?
McCain has repeatedly spoken of his having been in Vietnam as a OW. This experience has been his excuse for his less- than-stellar behaviors and his explanation of his experience in military affairs. In reflection on this experience I have wondered what he learned during that period of time, about how to manipulate people into doing his bidding. Combined with his erratic temper and penchant for a fight, some GOP members are concerned. The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine," Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), also a senior member of the Appropriations panel, told the Boston Globe recently. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me." I am hard pressed to be convinced that some of the strategy he has used within and outside of his Republican party is not laced, at best, with some of the psychological tactics used on OWs in Vietnam. Create confusion, then offer to rescue us from the confusion by offering the solution of his choosing: Him.
So, returning to the original discussion of the elephant in the room, those who have bought into the covert fear-mongering -- not knowing why you can't trust Barack Obama, not knowing why you don't "know him" when in reality there is more information available telling you who Obama is, than there has been about McCain or likely ever will be about alin. And as long as doubts, labels continued to be repeated over and over, in spite of evidence to the contrary, you will be confused....unless you face your fears and begin to seek the truth at all cost.
As I coasted around the Internet this weekend, I came across a Blog from an African American Republican, who I personally thought was fairly self-absorbed in his importance in the political landscape. He felt that he had been "outed" by the disclosure of his political choice, though I found that to be an oxymoron, since it was him writing the Blog. So I decided to respond in kind:
Being a conservative democrat, I always take issue with these kinds of articles, especially on a corporate media-owned website such as AOL/Time Warner, where I find their bias toward Obama to be palpable. I think that Black Republicans, as well as Black Democrats have the right to their point of view. I also believe that this new bent of Republicans whether they be Black or Women, to take any push back on their points of view as persecution, is ridiculous. I don't really see a reason to feel sorry for you. I do recognize the financial benefit that comes with being a Black Republican, so if that is what you are about, more power to you. But don't behave as though it's something you are secretly proud of (because you believe you are right), but we poor ignorant Democrats just are too ignorant to understand what's good for us and so you have to be, as you put it, on the "down-low". That is dismissive and insulting. I look at character first and foremost. I don't see any character in lying by omission -- which is deceit, overspending a small city's budget leaving it $20 million in the red, and taking pork barrel dollars and distributing it among the Alaska citizens to promote your popularity instead of giving it back to the government that provided it. Issues and drama follow Palin where ever she goes. She has yet to be allowed an interviewed by anyone, heck, her nickname in high school was "Barracuda". I have worked in corporate with the Palin personality types, so I understand exactly what the strategy is for selecting her. We shall see what the future brings, but please, if you have facts. bring it, but I have no sympathy for you or your political decisions. Your truth is not necessarily the truth.
Then on various articles, message boards there was a plethora of conversation about Sarah Palin, and the points of view were dramatically diverse, from the avid fans to the skeptical foes, both men and women. I do find it interesting that the Republican surrogates do not seem to have any problem with the ongoing sexist comments about Palin's looks. But that, was indeed a part of the strategy. Anyway, hopefully the various comments have some relevance:
How about the matter of quality. Like African Americans, we women should not want a woman in such an important role just because she is a woman, ( um, wasn't that called just being emotional) we should want her there because she has vision, integrity, and puts the American people before personal interests. Palin likes power, she likes how it feels. She was willing to lie by omission to get it. This is nothing more than The Same crap we have gotten the last eight years. What are her views on the issues again? Oh, that's right, she has yet to be interviewed. And to ask questions, why that's just sexist. Oh wait, isn't there a video of her saying that HRC was a whiner about sexism and the media? Yet she got McCain and party surrogates to whine for her instead.

About the Palin speech: Sarah Palin reads very well. No, I mean she READS very well. Her speech written to focus on so-called experience should backfire soon. Not only do the facts state that she mismanaged and manipulated during her terms as mayor and governor, the reality is that McCain has no more EXPERIENCE than Obama or Biden. McCain is running for president, not alin. But just like Bush, more smoke and mirrors to get you focused on anything except the issues. The notion that "she's hot" may get the non-thinking male vote, but will do little to help you as she continues to support big business and pork barrels. Hasn't anyone found it strange that she has yet to be interviewed? Oh, that's right, to ask her questions is just sexist and offensive When I was in corporate, I worked with women who fit the Palin profile. When I say her profile, I am speaking of the character, personality traits, Prefacing this with the fact that I am a long-time observer of who people are versus what they say. Folks say I have an uncanny knack. Palin is a woman who discovered that her looks and willingness to be one of the boys when it suited her needs. She understands her role in the McCain presidential race is to act as the Trojan horse. She has been allowed, this far, to say what McCain cannot get away with saying. She has demonstrated her willingness to drop whatever she is responsible for in order to pursue something with greater benefit, thus trading in Alaska which she promised never to leave behind. Who do I see a beautiful woman who is manipulative, deceitful and charming. By the time people figure out they've been fooled, she will have accomplished her goal and those who see her for who she really is will be dismissed as bitter and envious. She has already shown that she comes with a consistent amount of drama, which is purposed to distract from the real issues, Her views on creationism, lobbyists, pork barrel spending, the right of Alaska to become a sovereign territory, and her belief that the Iraq war was God-led is troublesome. Her educational resume is questionable and her track record as both mayor and governor leaves much to be desired. But I am certain that the strategy is to keep Americans focused on the Palin soap opera, and away from focusing on the facts and the issues; keep the competition off balance and the media in control. Stay tuned.

When I started writing this piece, my intent was, and still is, to suggest that each person reading this do a bit of introspection. Each of us has to consider whether our position is about what is right, OR is about being right OR is just about being on the winning side. We cannot count on the pundits or the polls to direct us to the truth. In case you did not realize it, there is a psychology behind all of these polls. The covert intent of the so-called political polling is to push the undecided toward a decision. Most people want to be on the winning side, no matter the game, becoming a vicarious winner in the process is what really counts. There is not a single survey that does not have a bias built into it, so that it ultimately achieves the desired answer to the questions asked. What I most want to encourage is a healthy and constructive dialogue about the elephant in the room. So ask yourself, ask each other if the amount of melanin in his skin is your personal roadblock: If Barack Obama was an Anglo, a WASP, was white as far as you knew, would you trust him? Would you vote for him? If your answer is honest and race is the issue, then the problem isn't Barack Obama and you are the one who must figure out why. It's not a cliche; your future really does depend on it.




 
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Monday, September 1st 2008

6:55 PM

SARAH PALIN DAUGHTER'S PREGNANCY AND TANGLED WEBS

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.  Sir Walter Scott

I applaud Obama's position on the matter of Sara Palin's daughter, telling us we should let it go because it is a private family matter and has nothing to do with the election. Before I let it go, I have to say this: This is really not about Palin's poor daughter's now very public pregnancy. Palin's announcement today told us everything about who Palin is. She did not immediately disclose the pregnancy of her seventeen year old daughter to the public and probably not to McCain's camp. Lying by omission is still deceit. IF McCain did have that knowledge, then they are both guilty of deceiving the public. If it was a non-issue why not fully disclose it at the very beginning? Palin has clearly demonstrated that she is willing to be deceitful to gain power. George Bush deceived us and we went to war over oil and money. AGAIN, is this what we want for our country? Is this the example we want for our youth? 

One more thing:   Laura Bush has admonished us all to treat Palin nicely. Subsequently, I have noticed today that anyone of the Republicans interviewed by the media, or in a discussion on the corporate media channels, when asked even the most reasonable question that, frankly, THEY should have asked about Palin, if they don't like the question OR don't have an answer, they immediately say "I am offended by that question." Really? Is this how it's going to be? Can't ask any questions because Palin is too sensitive or any questioning of her abilities is sexist? As a woman, I take issue with that. You can't have it both ways. You cannot be a part of the most important political decision we citizens have to make, yet hide behind your gender when hard questions are asked.

I say again that each of us has an individual responsibility to know where both candidates stand on the important issues.  I have done the reading, I encourage each person to do the same.  Then you need to take one person who isn't registered  to vote and get them registered and then on November 4, 2008, take one person with you to the voting location so they can vote.  This country, your country's future depends on it.  Four more years of the same is going to destroy US.

 

 

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Sunday, August 31st 2008

10:25 AM

ALASKAN GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN: MUCH ADO ABOUT...?

I needed a minute to mull over the matter of the Republican VP selection.  You know, Palin is nothing more than a willing pawn in the political game McCain is playing.  The selection of Palin says more about McCain than anything else.  It tells me that he is more focused on winning than on what is best for this country.  He is betting on the shallow perspective  I know for a fact that Republican Senator Richard Lugar thinks very highly of Senator Obama, who worked with him on international matters.  I am betting that but for the issue of party ties, more of the politicians in McCain's party would come out in endorsement of Obama.    Here's the thing:  I learned a long time ago, that the true definition of a true  leader is a person with both character and vision as his/her strengths who is smart enough, humble enough to surround him/herself with a team that brings other needed strengths to the table, more strategies, willing to push back when needed, yet share the same vision as the leader. Someone who truly listens and makes decisions based on what's best for those s/he represents.  I haven't seen any of that in McCain.   When asked about Palin's national security experience, Cindy McCain could not come up with anything beyond the fact that, after all, her state is right next to Russia. "You know, the experience that she comes from is, what she has done in government -- and remember that Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia." (ABC Today)  Palin's mother-in-law, Faye Palin, told a New York Daily News reporter that she didn't agree with Sarah on everything and hadn't yet decided how she would vote. She added: "I'm not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she's a woman and a conservative. Well, she's a better speaker than McCain," Faye Palin said with a laugh.
And then there is the more realistic view of those who really know who she is, back at home in Alaska.  Gregg Erickson, reporter for the Anchorage Daily, did an online chat with the Washington Post, in which he revealed that Palin's approval rating in the state was not the much-touted 80%, but 65% and sinking -- and that among journalists who followed her it might be in the "teens." He added: "I have a hard time seeing how her qualifications stack up against the duties and responsibilities of being president.... I expect her to stick with simple truths. When asked about continued American troop presence in Iraq, she said she knows only one thing about that (paraphrased): no one has attacked the American homeland since George Bush took the war to Iraq." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/2-top-alaska-newspapers-q_b_122625.html) Huh?
Meanwhile, the GOP promoters and pundits are, as I write, actually using Hurricane Gustav as a talking point for Senator McCain,  a thinly veiled attempt to parrot the words of Senator Obama in the speech he gave during the Democratic National Convention. But I am more interested in the deafening silence of women and GOP leaders across the country, who, unless they are caught in the headlights of a media camera, haven't made a carefully worded sound in praise of McCain's choice.  Hillary Clinton had and has far more substance; just being a woman should not be enough for the thinking voter.  It is my sincere belief that the citizens of the United States are not so shallow as to base their decisions upon looks, gender and a penchant for being perceived as one of the boys.  But then, I have been wrong before. 
I called my brother, the sports fanatic, and asked him to define what a "Hail Mary" is, given that is what several in corporate media called this decision when discussing McCain's selection for Vice President.  Turns out a "Hail Mary" is the last desperate play made to win a game and ninety five percent of the time it doesn't work.  Perhaps the poll that came out today (Sunday) says it all -- not that I have any faith in polls -- Senator Obama is now eight points ahead.
 
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Friday, August 29th 2008

11:14 AM

BARACK OBAMA: NOT AN AFRICAN AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, BUT A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WHO IS AFRICAN AMERICAN

The Democratic National Convention hit its crescendo Thursday night, with the acceptance speech of Senator Barack Obama before a stadium of over 85000 people in Denver and millions via televisions worldwide, I reflect on the gamut of emotions I felt this week, as I watched history being written right before my eyes.  Elation, enthusiasm, empathy resulting from the inspiring speeches, annoyance with the childish and pouting media, that seemed to be disappointed by the drama and disunity they couldn't seem to instigate – well, except among themselves.  Both he and the media became the tail of the dog this week and Obama and the DNC is wagging it.    As Obama spoke last night, the McCain camp was actually running around to surrounding states, renting buses, trying to scrape together 10000 people to witness his speech in Ohio today, where he's announcing his running mate. We have broken ground into a new era for this country.  In his speech, Presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out the blueprint for his plan of action, the details of which can be found at the click of a button on www.barackobama.com/issues.  He addressed every concern and missive raised by the GOP and the corporate media.  He issued the call to the McCain camp to “bring it” in the form of debates, he was ready.  And if you don’t know who Barack Obama is after this week, then it’s because you don’t want to know who he is and prefer to hold on to your personal perceptions and prejudices, unwilling to acknowledge you might be wrong.

 

I just received a call infirming me that Senator McCain has chosen a woman as his running mate, Sarah Palin, a former beauty queen – McCain is consistent – who is currently under investigation for abuse of power in the state of Alaska http://www.ktva.com/ci_10026165 .  She has no major experience foreign, military or otherwise, so we are supposed to believe that if something happens to McCain, she is qualified to answer that 3 a.m. call?  McCain is getting some really bad advice from someone, or he is so desperate and so shallow that he believes 18 million Clinton supporters will chose him over Barack Obama just because he chose a vice presidential candidate who is female, cute and Catholic?  I hope they understand what an insult that is to their intelligence and see the situation for what it transparently is.  And one more thing: This is for the Hillary Clinton supporters:  I would like to suggest, in light of Hillary Clinton’s sincere efforts during the National Convention to bring unity to the party, that her millions of supporters each send a dollar bill to her campaign headquarters to pay off the campaign debt she has hanging over her head.  

 

Barack Obama is an African American.  Barack Obama is not an African American Democratic Presidential candidate.  Barack Obama is a Democratic Presidential Candidate who is African American. This is not my original thought  -- well actually, I have been thinking about it but could not articulate it.  This is a quote from Congressman Lewis during an interview on CNN.  If we pay close attention to what this statement means, then perhaps we are on our way to dismantling the notion of what race is in a country that should be defined by its ability to embrace global diversity.  Race and gender neither masks nor defines the character of a person, their ability to lead and their vision of what is the best direction for a country.  Die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters should recognize their role in change; it’s not about Hillary Clinton at all, this is bigger than her, bigger than Barack Obama, it is about you and I understanding that our individual decisions on November 4, 2008 will collectively decide the direction this country takes. 

 

Go back and listen to Barack Obama www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/28/b., his wife Michelle, Joe Biden, Hillary and Bill Clinton, even if you are still determined to not know who the Democratic Presidential candidate is, what he stands for and how his vision and actions measure up to what must happen for  this country to survive. Then compare it to the actions, character and point of views of John McCain,   Then make your choice, but choose, because to not vote at all is the greater blunder.  And you will regret it.

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Monday, August 25th 2008

9:14 PM

TWO WIVES: WHICH IS BETTER VALUED?

Michelle Obama gave an exceptional speech.  It was both genuine and moving.  I think that those who continue to say that they don't know Michelle Obama and Barack Obama have made a deliberate choice not to see who they really are and are upset because the truth does not match their deliberate perceptions.  I am proud of her as a woman, as a mother and wife, as an American.  Many were in tears, how telling that was for all of us.  The spontaneity of the family dynamic at the end, said it all.  The genuine feeling of father to daughters, wife to husband, husband to wife could not have been scripted.
 
Meanwhile, Senator McCain has dispatched his wife Cindy, of all people, to Georgia.  I find this to be grossly inappropriate from the perspective of protocol and frankly just looks completely desperate.  Why on earth would you send your wife to an area of war, what exactly is she supposed to do there?  But it does speak volumes doesn't it?
  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/e-joyce-moore/mccain-supportive-of-wome_b_113503.html
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Wednesday, August 20th 2008

2:41 PM

ON AN E-MAIL FROM TYLER PERRY

I receive the e-mails from Tyler Perry's website, which I like because they are interesting and seem to be  personal and authentic.  I wanted to comment, however, on the one I just received and since they are posted online, I am sharing it here, along with my response:

Hi there,

We're getting close to the THE FAMILY THAT PREYS. Are you ready? September 12th can't get here fast enough.  Not to mention on that weekend I'll be 39 (smile). I still don't know what I'm going to do for my birthday...besides going to see THE FAMILY THAT PREYS, that is...LOL.

I got to thinking about something that I wanted to share with you. My new studio is going to be opening soon and I haven't really told this story, I don't think. If you've heard this then stop me, or just jump past it (smile). This is a long one, so hear me. If you're reading this at work, don't get in no trouble, read this later....

About two years ago, I bought a 75 thousand square foot building in
Atlanta. The building was in pretty bad shape, so I was in the middle of renovating it when everything went crazy! I had major contractor issues, permit issues, and even though the building had been a studio for 15 years, when I moved into it the regentrified neighbors went crazy. They did not want me there. Not to mention, even before we had finished the renovations we had outgrown the place. It was pretty ugly at the time. Nonetheless, it was my intention to finish this building.

Around this same time Bishop Paul Morton was trying to start a church in Atlanta after losing his in Hurricane Katrina. He was my childhood pastor, so of course, I helped out.  Anyway, I was met with so many roadblocks.  I was angry.  Then it hit me. Could this be God trying to tell me something?  At that moment I called one of my lawyers and told him to stop fighting the neighborhood, and let me just pray about it. He agreed. The next day he called me and told me to take a drive to this place. So, I drove out toa building that was once Delta Airlines' world headquarters, nearGreenbriar Mall in Atlanta.  If you're from Atlanta you know that this area ain't been regentrified...LOL.

I drove up to the gate looked at it and drove away. The place was run down. It had been vacant for 38 years (my age).I said,"No way, no way. I'm going to finish the building I'm in...no matter what!" I wasn't about to take on another project. I went to sleep that night but I couldn't sleep then, or even the next few nights for that matter. I said,"What is it God, what is it?" So, I got out of bed and drove back to the building and stood in front of the gates and said a simple prayer, "God am I supposed to leave where I am and come here?"

Sometimes we get so comfortable with where we are that we don't want to move. I said,"God make it plain." I started looking at the gates and there taped to the gates were hundreds of scriptures. I kid you not.  I got a chill up my spine and my eyes filled with water.  It could not have been more clear to me. The next day I called the realtor to buy the place and they said I was too late.  A pastor wanted to buy the entire 60 acres. I got off the phone and called Bishop Morton. I told him that I had looked at the place. He said, "I just looked at it yesterday, this has GOT to be God."  He then went on to tell me that they didn't want the entire 60 acres. They only wanted 30 and that they had planned to sell the 30 acres that I was interested in.   We had a good laugh, said a prayer and went on
from there.  Needless to say, we split the property. By me buying my
portion it was a huge blessing to them buying their portion.  When I tell you that I have not had one issue trying to get this new building
finished. The neighbors have not complained once. They have encouraged me all the way. They welcomed me with open arms. It's across the street from two senior citizens homes that I have adopted (I love me some seniors). I built 5 new soundstages, a 400-seat theater and a ballroom. I said all of that to say this, all of my life I have had things happen to me that I know it could not have been anything but God that did it. I know it.

I am a dreamer and sometimes when you have dreams you are met with obstacles, and your dreams will start to fade. But what I've found is that when God has given you a dream, no matter what it is, when you want to give up and believing becomes hard, and when you can't go any further, the dream itself will start to believe for you. The dream itself will start to carry you through with visions and hope and encouragement.

So, the new mantra for Tyler Perry Studios is "A Place Where Even Dreams Believe." Don't worry if you're met with opposition on your path to your goals. When you've done all you can, stand and surrender.  God will allow your dream to motivate you.

If you don't take away anything else from this LONG email take this,
PLEASE TAKE THIS. Protect your dreams, get away from negative thinking dark seekers. Keep your mind and spirit clean of the naysayers. Just believe. Only believe and it will come to pass.

Be Blessed,

Yo Boy
Tyler P.



I felt compelled to respond, in part because I have family and close friends who take this concept seriously, yet they use it to justify doing what they've always done without achieving different results.  Anyway, here are my thoughts:

I am a firm believer in Proverbs 3:5-6.  With all due respect, I do get concerned when those who are as successful as you are, make powerful statements that are true, but one size does not fit all.  And many people listen to you.  There has to be some reality checks included.  Because sometimes God says NO to what we want and we discover later that His NO a blessing.   My dreams are huge.  Some think that I ought to downsize my dreams. I will believe in my dreams as long as I know and remember that God is in charge of what they become.  How do I know when I'm on the wrong path?  When the obstacles become more than difficulties; they become huge STOP signs letting me know that I need to stop and find out if God is trying to tell me something.  Because if what I want is not God's will, it's just me trying to make something work that shouldn't -- AND God's not in it.  
Example: If you decide to marry someone, when all the signs tell you that s/he is controlling, abusive, in trouble financially, etc. -- and family and friends are trying to tell you that there's something wrong -- but it's your dream to have a wedding and you think God's gonna fix him/her, look at the fruits and ask yourself where God is in all this.  Anything God is not in will come to nothing,  at least that's my experience.  And this isn't negativity; this is about balancing faith with reality.  I stand in awe of Godly intercession and intervention.  But everything we want is not always for us and we need to realize that sometimes God is blessing us when He's saying that this is not the path

1 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Saturday, July 19th 2008

8:50 PM

MCCAIN ARTICLE ON HUFFINGTON POST

I wrote a blog piece on John McCain and it's been picked up by Huffington Post and  was published Friday, which is why it's not here.  Please go to their site, read and leave a comment:

   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/e-joyce-moore/mccain-supportive-of-wome_b_113503.html

If you want to take the time to do so, share the piece with your colleagues.  I am interested in the impact on watercooler political discussions, so please come back and let me know.

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Sunday, June 29th 2008

5:59 PM

POLITICAL MUSINGS: SENATOR CLINTON IS THE WRONG CHOICE FOR VICE PRESIDENT

Anyone remember Randal Pinkett? Randal Pinkett was an exceptional, highly talented and extremely well educated candidate who won on the Apprentice reality show two years ago. There were two things that made this particular season’s show a stand out. First, Pinkett was an African American. Second, the week-long controversy that resulted from his response to Trump’s public request that he share his win with the woman who was the runner up. I wrote about this at the time and my perspective on it is still posted  here in the archives. The bottom line was that Randal absolutely made the right decision when he refused to hire the runner up. It was a good business decision. Trump himself said that many high level corporate heads had called him to say that Randal had indeed made the right decision. Why? Both were competing for the one position. To bring the person who didn’t win back into the picture as your peer would only continue the competition. That would be bad for the business because the focus is on the continued competition and not the job at hand.

 

Here we are today with history being made with Senator Barack Obama winning the Democratic primary and ultimately he will win the general election. His choice for vice president is an important one, as will be his decisions on his cabinet appointments. With Bob Johnson, and other supporters of Hillary Clinton, making overtures to Democratic members of Congress, in hopes of her becoming the choice for vice president, it is imperative that we all step back and take a second look.  Senator Obama and his advisors should not give in to any real or implied pressures concerning Senator Clinton. She is absolutely the wrong choice. Even before the end of the primaries, when she playfully suggested that Obama would make a good vice-president, I did not believe that she would make a good vice president, nor did I believe that she would even consider it.

 

Surprisingly enough, she has been overtly and covertly attempting to position herself and it's not just because she needs some help settling her primary debts. But here’s the thing: she is not a good fit fora secondary role. She is a very strong-minded woman who was certain that she would be the presumptive nominee and has had a very hard time letting go of her dream, even when it was clear she had lost. The person who showed up in the last two weeks of her campaign defined for me who she really is.

 

I am a firm believer that true success in business, government, requires a leader who surrounds him or herself with people who are more talented, intelligent, strategic, even more experienced than he or she is and, most importantly, are on the same page as she or he is as the leader. Their only agenda is to work as a team, becoming successful in their own right by working as a team, adding depth and value through the skill sets, experience and talents they were chosen for, and following the vision of the leader. In a role as important as Presidency of the United States, one does not have the time or should take the time and energy to have to continually manage someone who really just wants your job. Hillary Clinton would never be happy in a second position, and has the ultimate potential of derailing Obama’s presidency with constant instigation of controversy.The baggage of entitlement that the Clinton's bring with them is an issue that overshadows any benefit she brings to the party.  She is better suited for and deserving of a cabinet position where she could devote her energies to the success of a specific vision she has always wanted to develop.

 

There is the socio-psychological aspect of what happens when a person of color is selected for a position. As Randal said himself : It would be the same as if I had won a gold medal in the Olympics and I was then required to share it with the bronze medal winner. He didn’t win because there was a quota to fill; Trump’s executive staff looks exactly as Trump wants it to because he chooses who he wants. Randal won because he consistently exhibited the leadership, talent, experience and strategic savvy required to make him a winner. It was, in fact, not as close a decision, as many have been lead to believe. So, why the “controversy”? What is the real issue that no one wanted to address directly? Larry King, in his interview of Pinkett, made a feeble effort to get to the heart of it, but he missed the mark because he came into the conversation with bias. When the Media approaches a subject with bias, they are simply stating a story according to their opinion and that is not objective journalism. King believed that she should have been hired and simply went through his show trying to convince Randal and Trump that Randal was wrong. While Trump may have genuinely, albeit naively, felt that race was not a factor, it, in fact, was on so many levels. In the executive world, genuinely capable, highly intelligent African American executives and managers can share one anecdotal story after another -- After all , one is told, you won’t mind taking one for the team? Or…you and I know that you are the better choice, but I need to reward Joe or Sally Sue because … -- about how they have been asked to share, diminish, even relinquish their awards, rewards, promotions, acknowledgements so that the other person, usually white, would feel better about not getting what they believe they were entitled to. Thus, Clinton supporters will likely dive into a fresh dish of anger when the decision about who should be vice president is made and if it’s not Clinton. It won’t matter to them that Obama made his choice based upon who is best for the position, not based upon making her – or anyone else – feel better about not getting what they believe they were entitled to. I am still interested in having a competent woman as vice president, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius for example. Someone who has the ability to work well with Congress and with the president – neither of which I believe Senator Clinton would be effective or – at the end of the day – happy with doing. (I would even like to see Donna Brazile as White House press secretary, but I am perhaps dreaming a little too much?)

The bottom line is that choosing Hillary Clinton as vice president for any reasons other than talent and capability is simply more of the same in politics. As a candidate for change, Senator Obama has the power to truly be the different politician that we need and make a different and wiser decision.

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Sunday, June 29th 2008

5:52 PM

POLITICAL MUSINGS: MICHELLE OBAMA - PURE CLASS

In the media cacophony that has been ringing in our ears since Senator Barack Obama announced that he was running for President of the United States, the women have finally become the voices of reason. Michelle Obama is a smart woman. While all the pundits were greedily pouring over their sources looking for some hiccup in the very smart appearance of Michelle Obama on ABC’s The View http://abc.go.com/daytime/theview/inf o?pn= news as guest host on Wednesday, she already knows that she won that particular battle. Every host, from Barbara to Whoopi, seemed mesmerized by the down to earth, straight-forwardness of Michelle Obama, who seemed very at ease with just being herself and letting the viewing audience know who Michelle Obama is. The fist bump issue was diffused and disposed of with grace and humor. She was especially appreciative of the support she had received from Laura Bush when the media had its feeding frenzy over her comment “For the first time, I am [really] proud of being an American.” Laura Bush understood what she was trying to say, and coached her in being a better steward of her words. She used this opportunity to show humility and gratitude and to let us all know that she was in a learning curve, but was gaining a clear understanding of the lay of the political land, even for the wife of the future President of the US .She was even brilliant in the nutrition portion of the show, admitting that hers was a bacon-loving family. Not turkey bacon, the real thing. A food that a true Muslim would never eat. (I still don’t get it; there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim, or a Catholic or a Baptist or…) Even the special guest Matthew Broderick was nervously in awe, speaking of how his son was an Obama fan. That very evening after the show, The View’s Republican right-winger, Elisabeth Hasselback was hustled onto FOX’s Hannity and Colmes, while the outspoken Joy Behar was the guest of Larry King on CNN. Hannity, Colmes and King were all salivating as they opened their respective shows, looking forward to new kill. They were disappointed. Elisabeth Hasselback http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolm es/ in her interview was very clear about one thing: she was not going to bad-mouth Michelle Obama. She was following Michelle’s lead. Michelle had grabbed her hand, congratulated her on being who she was, being a fine mother and said that she could get along with and respect her, even though they had very different political views. Although the pundit team went after Michelle from different angles, dredging up tired drama that had died months ago, Elisabeth, to her credit – and quite honestly, my surprise – made a conscious decision not to enable their need for new mud to sling. Joy Behar was an equally disappointing guest on Larry King, and did not provide Larry with the exclusive nugget of information he had hoped for. She was dismissed with dispatch. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/best oftv/ 2008/06/19/lkl.joy.behar.cnn But she too was not going to bad-mouth Michelle Obama. On Thursday, Cindy McCain, who was in Vietnam, at the time, doing her own work, was approached to comment about Michelle Obama, both by ABC and by CNN http://www.videospider.tv/Videos/Deta il/33 34243702.aspx . When asked to comment, yet again, about the now four-month old statement Michelle Obama had made, she said: I really don’t know exactly what she meant. Finally, she too, is following Michelle Obama’s lead. Cindy McCain also said: She is a fine woman, a good mother and we are both in an interesting line of work right now.

As you will note, when viewing her CNN interview, she too believes that family should be off limits and that the media should be focused on the two men and the issues. The women seem to be uniting in what seems to be a good idea. Stop focusing on rumor, innuendo and statements taken out of context. Focus on the facts and issues at hand. I believe the women took the lead, following the example Michelle Obama set, as though making a silent pact ,and decided to not actively or passively participate in any further mud-slinging fests.

This seems to disappoint the various news entities who took a hot minute to reflect on the legacy of Tim Russert, before they went on with business as usual. But then, in all fairness, maybe there are a few who are, perhaps, checking their yellow journalism hats at the door. Dan Abrams had a panel of media and politicals at the top of his show, discussing an important point that will hopefully, finally, put to bed the Michelle Obama “ American” statement. He wanted to know what the difference was between what Michelle Obama said and John McCain’s repeated comment: I really didn't love America until I was deprived of her company. In or out of context, those are some interesting words. I was not in love with America until I was deprived of her company," McCain said again, at a recent town meeting here when asked to describe the impact of being a POW. Lars Larson, radio talk show host, when questioned by Dan Abrams about his consistent spewing of hate-filled innuendos, and direct assaults on Michelle Obama, http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=sbM WdTx7uYY called the Obamas terrorist affiliated and dangerous when asked how Michelle Obama's comment about love for America was any different from John McCain's comment that he's used more than once: The bullying, commando, over-talking Larson could not respond with any reasonable discourse and was obviously missing from the next segment of the show, but not before he was dressed down by Abrams for his rumor mongering, stereotyping and Abrams even suggested that his were the actions of a racist.. It is fascinating to note that for all of his hate-filled diatribe, he has never met or talked to Michelle Obama, yet he purports to know who she is.

So maybe, just maybe, the sad event of the passing of Tim Russert, combined with what suddenly seems to be a uniting front between wives of the politicians and a few women in the media -- who are consciously choosing to take that higher road -- will become a new paradigm that all of those with the power of the microphone, the keyboard or the internet blogs will begin to buy into. Maybe, just maybe, the media will begin to check each other and themselves and get back on the road to quality journalism. Regardless of the spin according to the various media mongers, Michelle Obama won this particular battle. If you missed your chance to get to know who she is, do take the time to view it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59twO1 fJwtQ . She stepped out as a woman, a leader, a peacemaker and did it without sacrificing who she truly is. Take note, ladies and gentlemen, she has already set the standard for how the upcoming First Lady in the 21 st century should be defined.

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Sunday, June 29th 2008

5:47 PM

MUSINGS ON POLITICS: JAMES DOBSON: WRONG...TWICE

I guess every one has to get their fifteen minutes from somewhere during this very visible presidential campaign. Apparently James Dobson is looking for his. Let me introduce you, in case you never heard of this man or his organization: James Dobson, a religious power and head of the conservative religious group, Focus on the Family that is headquartered in Colorado. He and Tom Minnery, senior vice president of this group, accuse Senator Barack Obama of “ distorting” the Bible and pushing a "fruitcake interpretation" of the Constitution, in a June 2006 speech to the liberal Christian group, Call to Renewal http://www.calltorenewal.com/ . Obama mentions Dobson in this speech and Al Sharpton as well.

Dobson’s criticism was aired on his organization’s radio show, Tuesday, June 24, 2008, and of course, the organization provided The Asso ciated Press with an advance copy of the pre-taped radio segment. Dobson, who is a minister, criticizes examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy - chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application." "Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said. Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.

The problem is Dobson is wrong. There is absolutely nothing in the New Testament indicating that Jesus removed any of the commandments, any of the Holy Days identified in Leviticus 23, or for that matter, any of the dietary health laws that are identified in the New Testament. Yes, I am going there, hope you will follow. Yes, I read the Bible, even did a thirteen page research article on Is Church Your Religion ? And, Yes, I am going to give you something to take a look at as proof that he’s wrong:

Jesus Christ said in John 14:15 If you love me, keep my commandments. And His commandments did not die with Him: John 14:19-21 After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also. In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." Christ added a new commandment to re-emphasize His expectations, although it is also a verse in the Old Testament: Leviticus 19:18.

The purpose of Jesus Christ’s becoming a human for a short period, was to give humanity another chance at eternal life through His physical death and to teach the teachers of his doctrines. Christ did not come to give us a free pass to do whatever we want to do and just pray, or do penance, to negate whatever we’ve done. Christ never said to throw out the baby with the bathwater. His sacrifice was the supreme sacrifice and thus the physical sacrifices were eliminated. His objective was to take humanity to a new level in making the physical keeping of His Law a spiritual matter, on another level not required in the Old Testament. Malachi 3:6 For I am the Lord; I do not change … The health laws never changed: pigs are still intended to be the natural garbage disposals, which is why they eat their own waste, just as shrimp, catfish, lobsters, all shellfish are bottom feeders that keep the oceans and lakes clean, even when they are “farm raised”, they as other animals and sea creatures, have a specific purpose and, according to the Bible, being eaten by humans is not one of them. There are some whose religious beliefs tell them that Romans 14 eliminates the health laws of the Old Testament, when, in fact, the reference to unclean meats simply refers to meat offered to idols as sacrifices: see I Corinthians 8: 4-13 where it is put into context. Now I just explained to you what I believe. You, as an individual, have the right to refute or pushback on my beliefs (but if you bring it, come with support for your point of view), find it interesting but not applicable to your beliefs or just ignore it and move on. In other words, beleve it or not. Here is the interesting thing: Churches and religions alike, Christians of all faiths, humans in general, have had the amazing propensity since Adam and Eve, to take God’s words – be they verbal or in writing – and find a way to use them to justify whatever it is they want to do or not do. This has been the case since the beginning of time, even during the time when Jesus Himself was on the earth.  Note his view concerning the commandments and mankind: Matthew 15: 5 - 9 But you say 'Whoever tells his father or his mother, "Whatever support you might have received from me has been given to God,"  does not have to honor his father.' Because of your tradition, then, you have disregarded the authority of God's word.You hypocrites! How well did Isaiah prophesy of you when he said,'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.  And just as corporate media, political parties and so-called religious entities are doing today – Jesus Christ’s and his apostles words are taken out of context and touted as being a truth that should be accepted without contest, simply because a person has control of the microphone. Distortion of the Bible by Barack Obama? I don’t think so. And if this is the way he understands the Bible, how is it a distortion? In this country, we still have the right to understand Christianity the way we understand it. What we don’t have the right to do is tell someone else that what they believe is distorted or not true because it doesn’t look like what we believe. Proverbs 21:2 All a man's ways seem right to him, but the Lord weighs the heart .

The reality is that Dobson has an agenda: his far right conservative organization does not like abortion rights and he doesn’t like Obama…or McCain. Dobson said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality," labeling it "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution." Ah yes, the Constitution. The Constitution does give Dobson the right to get on his religious radio show and take a two-year old speech, slice it up so that it’s taken out of context and use the power of the microphone to distort its meaning. And here is where he is wrong again: There is a pervasive power that comes from being a religious leader. People tend to believe whatever you say if you are their minister or their religious leader even if you are wrong. Most don’t have the courage, as the Obamas did, to speak up and then to walk away, no matter how personally painful that separation is. As I have said before in other blogs, I know exactly what they experienced, having been there myself. I think Dobson is deliberately distorting the Bible to fit his own agenda and using his power as a religious leader to get people to think as he does.  It is not only an issue of separation of church and state, because churches are non-profit entities, it’s an ethical issue of misuse of power to serve one’s own agenda. His justification for delving into politics is that the radio program was paid for by a Focus on the Family affiliate whose donations are taxed, Dobson said, so it's legal for that group to get more involved in politics. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/24/ja mes-dobson-accuses-obam_n_108851.htm   So, it’s OK to justify use of one’s religious clout to sway followers in a political matter. To sow discord so that people will follow your lead. To bear false witness against your neighbor by attempting to create a perception of who he is even when it's not reality. How hypocritical. And it’s just plain wrong.

 

 

0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Wednesday, June 18th 2008

9:30 PM

POLLY-TICKED-CALLED SPIN

Media noise
Played by the boys
Planning the next move
All this is new.
And not expected.
How did a man who don't think like us
Won't do like us
Don't look like us
Get past the door.
He wasn't invited to our party.
No need to worry
This is the plan
They're all suspect
So we'll just fan
The fire.
It didn't work.
What's that you hear?
I hear it too.
The roar of a crowd
For someone who
Don't look like you?
Walked through the fire did he?
Don't understand.
They're just emotional
Who knows the man?
Can't find a fault
We can make stick
Nothing important
Let's call him slick
Say he's a muslim(what's wrong with that?)
Say he's a terrorist
Say he's a secret
Say something's amiss.
Say it's his fault
The actions of others
Cast doubt in the minds
Of all our brothers,
And sisters and mothers
And fathers like us.
I don't understand
What's the big fuss?
A gaffe, innuendo,
An outright lie,
If we get caught
Just apologize
Say we misspoke.

Still can't stop him.

New plan in play?
What can it be
Perhaps a bait and switch
We'll see?
Put someone else
Better able than cain
In place so that
We can remain
In power.
It's not about Wright
Or wrong you see
Or gaffes
Or even policies.
It's about the courage
To see the truth
That the color of skin
Is not the proof
Of what makes a leader
What makes him right
Can you get past
His skin, not white?
Cause if you can
And if you do
Then change will come
For me, for you.
And it will be good.

(c) 2008


0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Thursday, May 22nd 2008

11:27 PM

MUSINGS ON POLITICS: OBSERVATIONS, REPRESENTATION, SOLUTIONS

This blog may be a tad long, but  is worth the read because the second part explains all the confusion and media noise about the Michigan and Florida Democratic delegates  AND a solution to the problem.  The timeline took more than a minute to research, but now I understand what happened to get us to here in the process.

Jonathon Rieder,author, The Word of the Lord is Upon Me, a book about Martin Luther King, was Tavis' guest tonight on a pre-recorded show.  Tavis Smiley  brought up what I would suppose is his primary issue with Senator Obama: to him, Senator Obama is "not Black enough."   Within a question posed to Rieder was a poorly disguised jab at Senator Obama, because he, unlike Martin Luther King, does not call African Americans "my people."    Rieder pointed out to Tavis that both Obama and King were/are approaching race in this country from two very different points of view, but that they were both on the same page, having the same ideologies.  But from my perspective this response did not sit well with Tavis, and Rieder was efficient in moving the conversation back to his book.  I am still trying to understand why there is this mentality that people must somehow meet this undefined standard of being "black enough?"   Would it not make more sense for us all to consider the concept of simply being human enough?  Look, Senator Obama has overcome some major obstacles in his bid to become President of this country..none having to do with the actual issues affecting all of us.    Ask yourself, what would Martin Luther King do?  Would he be supportive of the greater common goal or continue to pick away at someone because of some intangible standard set by a person or persons who keep moving the bar according to their own personal agenda?  Holding a grudge, because someone did not come to your party is not the direction one should go in and frankly it's childisn and petty. The Bible says that the greatest leader is one who knows how to serve the most, and I would add, who doesn't care who gets the credit.   Tavis has in many ways, become a leader within the African American community. I would expect that after a diligent review of Senator Obama's position on the critical issues facing this country, unless he can clearly identify tangible reasons to not support Senator Obama as diligently as he has supported Senator Clinton, who by the way has taken a dangerously desperate path by equating the issues surrounding the seating of Florida and Michigan delegates (a DNC problem, not an Obama problem, which the DNC needs to take care of immediately..but more on that in a moment) with what is happening in Zimbabwe.  Not only do I find this comparison a gross overstatement and equally offensive, I find it incredibly sad.  After all Senator Clinton has done for women by staying in the game and not giving up, as a leader, she too has to figure out a way to win by losing out on the opportunity to be President this time.    She cannot allow desperate wailings, when she knew what the rules of the game were when she decided to play, to become the legacy she leaves behind in this historic political experience.  I do hope she will gather herself and look for the opportunity she can live with and negotiate to get it.  No I don't think she is the right choice for vice president, as too much acrimonious water had gone under the bridge.  I am interested in knowing more about Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and what potential she has to bring to the vice presidency. 
 
But before we can start talking about a vice president, the whole delegate issue needs a speedy and proactive resolution.  According to the DNC website, 2025 delegate votes are required for a given presidential candidate towin their candidacy.  This number does not include delegates from Florida and Michigan, the delegations of which were reduced by 100% by action of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, pursuant to the Party’s Delegate Selection Rules, because the State Parties in these states submitted plans for holding binding events prior to the earliest date allowed (February 5th, with the exception of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina) by the Rules. 
 
What happened to get Florida, Michigan, the DNC, Senators Clinton and Obama to this point of contention?
Check out the Timeline:
 
  August 19, 2006   Delegate Selection Rules adopted by the DNC,
 
December 2, 2006  Regulations for the Convention adopted by the Rules and Bylaws Committee
 
Prior to  August 25, 2007  Florida's Republican governor and Republican controlled legislature enact a  state law moving the primaries to January 29th. The Florida DNC chose to comply.
 
August 25, 2007    DNC gives Florida thirty days to submit a new plan for a Primary or Caucus or lose all of its delegates to the nominating convention, as a direct result of the adoption of a resolution from committee person Ralph Dawson from NY to strip FL of all of its delegates and Presidential candidates that campaign in a state in violation would lose any delegates they win in that state. But committee co-chairman Jim Roosevelt said after the vote that in this case, there would be “no sanction on the campaigns since there would be no delegates at stake. In adopting the harsh penalties, the rules committee appeared to be sending a message to other state parties and legislatures such as Michigan, that any moves ahead of the Feb. 5 window would be met with stiff penalties and little to no leniency.
 
November 19, 2007  Michigan Appeals Primary Date Decision To State Supreme Court.   The state's attorney general asked the state supreme court to let the state, for heaven's sake, keep its Jan. 15 primary law. A lower-court judge invalidated the primary because the state parties wouldn't have share information about who voted and in what primary.  Republican legislators seem more willing than Democratic legislators to try their hand at a new law. Why? Democrats, in particular, worry that the elections will be used to collect signatures for recall petitions in light of the state's historic tax hike. If, say, 2 million Michiganders show up on Jan. 15, it'll be much easier to collect recall signatures by district. Once the petititon is initiated, the collectors need 10,000 signatures per district and have 90 days to complete the task.  So this was all about local state politics versus the Presidential primary.
 
December 1, 2007   Democratic leaders voted to strip Michigan of all its delegates to the national convention next year as punishment for scheduling an early presidential primary in violation of party rules.  Candidates signed a pledge stating that they would not campaign  or spend money in Florida or Michigan because the DNC rules were broken.  Four candidates removed their names from Michigan and Florida ballots a fifth did not do so by the deadline.  Michigan Democrats moved their state's primary date to January in an effort to increase the state's influence in the nominee selection process, arguing Iowa and New Hampshire unfairly dominate the process.  Obama's campaign chose not to place his name on the Michigan ballot so as not to violate national Democratic Party rules.
 
Democrats in Michigan were told that they could not write in votes for candidates whose names were not on the ballot, but they could vote uncommitted if they were voting for Senator Obama or other candidates.  Radio and other media was paid for by Michigan Congressman and Councilwoman Conyers, in an attempt to get people to vote regardless, even if they voted uncommitted. If at least 15 percent of the people vote "uncommitted," the state Democratic Party must send that percentage of delegates to the national convention uncommitted. Forty percent of the votes received were uncommitted.
 
My conclusion: In spite of allegations to the contrary, Senator Obama had nothing to do with the exclusion of Florida and Michigan delegates. This insidious mess was created by the DNC, although the Republicans of Florida, and both the Democrats and Republicans in office or on committee also got their hands dirty in creating this problem for the true victims: the actual voters.  It would appear to me that the DNC need only create a new plan for the future that would hold the state primaries  by quadrant regions , and each schedule each quadrant by lottery.  In other words, pick number 1 - 4 out of a bag.  How hard could that be?  And then no one state would matter over another.  Equal opportunity with no more of this nonsense.  That said, I would encourage the DNC -- because this is, after all, their responsibility to resolve, no matter who is to blame, -- to seat fifty percent of the "committed delegates" from both Michigan and Florida and split those delegates between Senators Obama and Clinton AND then seat all of the "uncommitted delegates" from both Michigan and Florida (if there were any uncommitted in Florida) and let them decide who to cast their votes for. And add those delegate numbers to the delegate vote requirement.  No one will see this as being fair, but everyone will grudgingly agree that this is right.
0 user comments / YOUR THOUGHTS

Friday, May 16th 2008

5:50 PM

MUSINGS IN POLITICS: FACTS BEAT PERCEPTION ANY DAY

I had a moment today, when I took information about a project from an extremely reliable source thus did not double check the information.  The information was wrong, and by the time I decided to double check, I had called people and hmmm, damaged my credibility.