Mccain is claiming Obama is running for Carter's second term.  Since he is an honest politician I guess he is sincere. Unfortunately he had missed most of the preceding Nixon years. Like Bush, Nixon had shredded the Constitution, run the military into the ground and created conditions for the massive stagflation that followed.
  Inheriting that mess, Carter(not Reagan) laid the foundation of a strong military, put in policies that killed off inflation and restored an honest government. I just wish he had been a better rhetorician.

The sad news of Ted Kennedy's recent diagnosis is causing many progressives to reflect on Kennedy's marvelous public service. And for those that remember 1980, the similarities between Kennedy and another icon of the Democratic party - Hillary Clinton - are unmistakable.

It was in 1980 that President Jimmy Carter swept through many early primaries. But as the process played out, Carter's weaknesses came to light. Kennedy came on to claim many later primaries.

The mood of the country and polls indicated Carter was nearly unelectable, but the Democratic party apparatus clung to him. Knowing the disaster awaiting in the fall, Kennedy charged ahead and fought. Even with Carter holding a huge delegate advantage, Kennedy bucked the system.

We all owe a debt of gratitude to Jimmy Carter. This is a man that has consistently tried to do what others in the political arena seem unable to do, and that is to live up to their own expectations, regardless of the political costs. His recent trip to the Middle-East was Carter at his finest. While he understood all to well that the compromised, immoral regimes of both Israel and Washington did not support his mission and were unlikely to approve anything that came out of his meetings with Hamas, he chose to go in order to illustrate to the world what these two governments are really about. I believe Carter was successful in illustrating that neither America nor Israel want to pursue a realistic solution for peace. If anything, his visit proved once again, that Israel seeks not peace, but capitulation.

My family's Passover dinners suffered a few heavy arguments over the weekend. Nothing simple, like Gefilte etiquette or spurrious afikomen claims... just the typical Israeli/Palestinian conflict argument likely going on all over the world at similar dinners.

Passover being a holiday celebrating liberation -- and celebrating righteous action -- and celebrating ends justifying the means -- and so on... it's bound to come up.

My parents, annual visitors to Jerusalem and super hawking Israel supporters, still maintain some of their former liberal hearts. They feel compassion amidst the clear rage over the school bombing earlier this spring. Promising.

I'm on the other side; mildly hawkish, but unsure how Israel survives maintaining an occupational army. Also, unsure how Israel survives with the hole in the soul that comes from being an occupational army, no matter how righteous the cause or perilous the danger.

Carter came up. The parents were appalled he'd meet with Hamas. I asked how appalled they were that he met with Sadat. It was the "Obama would sit down with terrorists" argument all over again that they keep having with me. We avoided it this weekend. They're die-hard Clintonites but I think the reality of an Obama nod is sinking in. Still, they get pretty Lieberman over matters of Israel.

"What if this is what it takes, though?" I'd ask. Hamas is a political force among the Palestinians, they're no future without including them -- just as (they hate the analogy) Hagganah and Irgun had come together and no, the Irgun were freedom fighters, not baby-murdering terrorists, I get that, but there's a point in that anyway.

The response was that Hamas can't be trusted, or believed, Carter is several yiddish words, a few possibly made up, none nice. Although my mom at least admitted that what's going on now hasn't worked and that something new was concievable, if repugnant.

ANYWAY...

Just got an email from my Dad, forwarding the Yahoo News story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080421/ap_o n_re_mi_ea/syria_hamas_israel;_ylt=Akn.. RqH7MKXLY5PhMdL2u.s0NUE

... about Hamas offering truce -- land for peace -- through Carter and his meeting. My dad's comment "Unlikely. But you're right. I thought the same thing about Sadat."

Fact is, I do doubt this will lead to anything. It'll likely fall apart before day's end. And yeah, I remember having hope during the Bill, Barak (Ehud) and Arafat camp David meet in 00. That couldn't have crashed harder. If I remember correctly, it was a Passover bombing that fully tipped the scales away from peace. But the 8 years since have been pretty bad. It's a new game board. New opportunities to have hopes crushed. But for the moment, I let myself get a little verclempt. Why not. It's a holiday.

It's amazing how ideas that were rejected just a year ago are flying through cyberspace as well as real-space, at the speed of light. I'm talking about two things here. The first I'll mention is the idea that both the Democrats and the Republicans' are pawns of the corporate power structure in this country. It will probably seem hard to believe now, but just a short time ago I was called all sorts of things for bringing that up. Since 2004, I have been writing about campaign financing and the need for reform. This one issue is the basis of corporate control along with the "good folks" on K-Street that staff 70 lobbyist's for every legislator we have on Capitol Hill. Gee, what a great system we have up there (for the legislators and the lobbyists). I can't wait to run for office myself so I can get in on those goodies they're passing out (only kidding), this can't last forever...or can it?

As of late, someone from Camp Obama - a surrogate of Sen. Obama - has dredged up Monica's blue dress drivel. I believe it's safe to say that topic has been covered at length. However, if we're going to talk about stains - let's talk about Sen. Obama's foreign policy adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski and his stains upon credibility. And decency.

For a decade now, the people of Nebraska's 2nd District have been represented by the "Boy Congressman" Lee Terry. If you don't know who he is, be careful not to confuse him with the guy from the Stride gum commercials, which is an easy mistake to make:

The creepiness of their resemblance lasts even longer than the flavor of the gum.

Anyways, in 2006, Lee made energy issues the central theme in his campaign. However, after 8 years of doing nothing (as everyone knows the government is supposed to do) on the issue - or for that matter, any issue other than the contentious debate over post office naming - he's feeling vulnerable. Therefore, Terry is taking a page out Bush's 2004 play book - if your constituents keep demanding that you "do something," just scare them into voting for you.

Continued...

Chris Bowers has posted here and at his site, Open Left, an interesting and provacative contrast for politics.  And given that Bob Herbert, a columnist for one of America's biggest newspapers with his take on the history of Republican behavior  in which he tosses both Ronald Reagan and Lee Atwater into the dust bin of history, merits an affirming response on my part..  I too think I should make it known that 'non-issues' is an equally important tool for measuring our political participation, as well.

So, follow me over the 'jump', and learn a tad more on
an innovative approach to conceptual history or for Sonoran Desert 'creationism' of 30 years ago.  :-)