Tag: Democrats

Obama Fever – Not Feeling It

Jon Ponder

In the unlikely event that Sen. Barack Obama becomes the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, I will vote for him in the general election that November. However, I will be very surprised if there is any chance he will win.

It is a harsh indictment, I know, but while Americans will vote a functionally retarded white guy into the Oval Office twice, there is no chance in hell the country is ready to vote for a black person or, for that matter, a white woman.

I agree that he has all the attributes ascribed to him by the Gang of 500 — he’s smart, well-spoken and telegenic, and all of those qualities would be a refreshing change after eight years of Bush. Unfortunately, none of those qualities will have an impact, finally, on his ability to win.

His lack of experience is a factor, but the main reason he’ll lose, I’m sorry to say, is his father’s race.

It appeals to our higher selves to believe that America is ready to elect an African-American president. Unfortunately, recent electoral history indicates otherwise:

  • Harold Ford Jr.’s loss of the Tennessee senate seat to the revolting Bob Corker last year.
  • Former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt’s two close losses to the even more revolting Sen. Jesse Helms in North Carolina a decade ago.
  • Former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley’s two losses to the odious Gov. George Deukmejian in California in the 1980s.

In each of these cases, white independent voters just couldn’t vote for a black candidate, even though in each instance the black candidate was equally or more intelligent, articulate and experienced than the white candidate.

There were other factors, of course. Both Gantt and Bradley were mayors of the biggest cities in their states, and thus stigmatized in the eyes of rural voters. Both Gantt and Ford were targeted with racist advertising. Sen. Helms ran an ad showing a white man receiving a rejection letter for a job purportedly because a black man had been given “his” job because of affirmative action. Ford was the target of the infamous “Harold, call me” ad that implied he dated white women, heaven forfend.

In the cases of both Bradley and Gantt, polling throughout the election showed close races, but on election day, the white candidates won decided victories. So white people were telling pollsters they would vote for a black candidate but couldn’t actually do it when the time came.

Of course, Deval Patrick was elected last year as Massachusetts’ first black governor, and as a presidential candidate, it wouldn’t surprise me if Obama were to win Massachusetts. He might even win all the states John Kerry won in 2004, but as we saw then, that was not enough.

Every election is momentous but the stakes are as high as they can be in 2008. The future of the United States depends on a Democratic victory. It is a harsh indictment, I know, but while Americans will vote a functionally retarded white guy into the Oval Office twice, there is no chance in hell the country is ready to elect a black person or, for that matter, a white woman.

Like all good liberals, I yearn for the day when race, gender and, what the heck, sexual orientation, are not a factor in who we elect to be president. And while I wish Sen. Obama well in the coming campaign, unfortunately, America is not there yet.

Sen. Johnson Upgraded to ‘Fair’ Condition

Jon Ponder

Forbes.com:

Sen. Tim Johnson’s condition has been upgraded from critical to fair, four weeks after he was hospitalized for a brain hemorrhage, his office said Tuesday.

The South Dakota Democrat, who was rushed to the hospital on Dec. 13 and underwent emergency surgery, remains in intensive care, said his spokeswoman, Julianne Fisher.

“The senator continues to make progress,” Fisher said. “The next step would be rehabilitation and we hope that would happen within the week.”

Bush: Lamest of the Lame Ducks Limps Toward Irrelevance

Buck Banks

Lonely at the bottom of the top: As the Democrats enjoy their newfound ascendancy in the Congress, the president is finding less and less to enjoy in the waning years of his second term. Indeed, if he wasn’t such an arrogant and ignorant bastard, one could almost be tempted to feel a little bit sorry for him. Congressional Quarterly’s Craig Crawford offers a snapshot of the Bush administration in decline.

With a new Congress that’s run by Democrats, a restive public that’s pining for change and a government in Iraq that’s descending into chaos, the way forward in Washington might not include George W. Bush.

It seems the president is positioning himself as just another spectator on the outskirts of power — firing off letters to the editor. Perhaps he should start his own blog.

Despite the power he has to ramp up his use of the veto, and his tenacious hold on his powers as commander in chief, Bush faces a tough challenge to remain relevant in the waning 24 months of his presidency. Indeed, if not for his war-making clout, this president might be the lamest lame duck ever.

There was something almost sad about Bush putting his own name on an op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal that laid out his legislative agenda on the eve of the formal Democratic takeover of Capitol Hill. Clearly gone are the days when Vice President Dick Cheney could use a private meeting with Republican lawmakers to set the congressional priorities list. Now, it seems, the president is positioning himself as just another spectator on the outskirts of power — firing off letters to the editor. Perhaps he should start his own blog.

Democrats are making the most of returning to power at the Capitol after a dozen years on the outs. Armed with a midterm election mandate widely seen as a repudiation of Bush, they are talking tough about dealing with the White House. For symbolic starters, Cheney was compelled to give up his ornate office just off the House floor to Charles B. Rangel, the New York Democrat who is now chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

As the clock ticks past the three-quarters mark on the Bush presidency, it is the new, 110th Congress and its crop of 65 new faces that will appear the fresher and more promising, garnering the lion’s share of news media attention — while administration figures come across more and more as yesterday’s news.

In response to the political test posed by that dynamic, Bush is calling for bipartisanship. Funny how the losing side in an election almost always ends up being the one to call for magnanimity. After 12 years of being made almost invisible, especially in the House, Democrats appear in no mood to do anything but pay lip service to the current calls for collaboration. Although careful not to say so publicly, congressional Democrats are champing at the bit for payback. Evicting Cheney from his office was just the beginning.
[…]

Dem Leaders to Bush: Escalation of Troops in Iraq Won’t Work

Jon Ponder

Here’s an excerpt from a letter sent to Pres. Bush today by the Democratic leaders of the Congress:

We believe the way forward is to begin the phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror.

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

“I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It’s easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future. ”

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin the phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement. In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

Sincerely,

Harry Reid, Majority Leader

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker

Democratic Senate’s Top 10 Action Items

Jon Ponder

Bob Geiger has the complete list but here are the bullet points:

1. Ethics reform.

2. Raising the minimum wage.

3. Reform the Medicare Prescription Drug program.

4. Acting on the 9/11 Commission Recommendations.

5. Funding stem cell research.

6. Energy reform.

7. Easing the financial burden of college tuition.

8. Strengthening and rebuilding America’s military.

9. Comprehensive immigration reform.

10. Pay-as-you-go legislation.

Sounds like a pretty good start.