While criticizing Senator Obama's qualifications to be President, I have often mentioned different people who are qualified in the traditional sense.

While Obama is qualified for 2 reasons:

1.  voters (like me) are willing to vote for him, so that ends the question

2. Bush and Bill Clinton have so lowered the standard that now basically anyone who the elites agree on is acceptable.  

Clinton was found to have low ethical standards in many ways and was impeached (wrongly)  for misbehavior (one half of the country thinks no one could be worse).

Bush has been found to have low professional standards, bad judgement in many ways, and overall doing such a bad job, that now the other half of the country thinks no one could be worse.

Yet,  Charlie Rangel is an African American qualified in the traditional sense (except his age):

+ Korean War hero
+self-made person who worked his way up
+expererience in Congress with actual achievements like co-creation of the Congressional Black Caucus; being top democrat and now Chair of the Ways and Means.

He is pragmatic, Patriotriotic and a good person.

To my knowledge he has been married to 1 person for many years.
He is a good role-model for many people.
He has a history of good relations with Republicans while being a solid Liberal on policy.

He's under seige by the nytimes and washpost for alleged ethics shortcoming.  I support Rangel against these ethics issues 100%:

http://wcbstv.com/national/Charles.B.Ran gel.2.772873.html

I detest this "good government" attitude that tries to imply corruption in government.  I don't have a problem with people doing common sense things in the course of business.

We should reject people like William Jefferson who are apparently crooked and criminal minded.

We should stop trying to find "conflicts of interests" and the like with good Congress-people who divulge everything and are straight shooters.

I just wanted to put some meat on the bones of my contention from the Primary that people could be against Obama because he wasn't qualified and not be racist or making up reasons to vote against him.

If Rangel was 15 years younger with his current resume, he'd be a great Dem. candidate for President and no one could argue he was an affirmative action choice.

While I'm voting Obama because he's the dem nominee, I won't forget what a horrible campaign that he ran in the Primary's by playing the race card.  I plan on holding he and his campaign accountable until they repudiate it.

It should be easy, because he/they would be doing it as winners.

The subtext of the "dispute" between Obama and Jackson is that some in the black community suspect Obama's subliminal and sometimes overt message to Americans in general and white Americans in particular is that here is a black person who is promoting the idea:

America is not racist!

...And in this I think the Civil Rights community is correct.

Barack Obama is proving both in his personal story, and his political journey this year that:

2008 America is not racist.
The vast supermajority of Americans (I would guess over 90 percent) treat people the same with respect to race.  The other 10 percent are marginalized and left to try to disguise their bias in such indirect terms that it has become meaningless.

But if this is the case, the question would beg, why is the African American community still lagging behind others in practically everything good, and leading the pack in almost everything bad.

Whether its:

healthiness
poor education
perpertrators of crime
victims of crime
overall income/wealth

when looked at as a group (dubious proposition in my opinion because of the enormous diversity), blacks are worse off STATISTICALLY.

and on things that are good like

There persists a racial gap.

The answer lies in personal responsibility.  

It is politically incorrect to say this in America and especially black America.

But that is the case.

There is no longer, and hasn't been for awhile people rooting for failure or working to hurt black interests.

African Americans face similar obstacles as every other group of people.  Maybe different in some respects, but no more odious.

The answer lies in an addiction to rap music and entertainment that celebrates "thuggery" and devalues education.

The answer lies in women choosing to have sex/get pregnant/have babies without being married.  In fact, without comtemplation of a stable home.

The answer lies  in grown men who hold on to child-hood grudges and fantasies of being a "player" rather than taking responsiblity to get educated and plan for the future.

The answer lies in a culture that distrusts law enforcement more than criminals who attack them.

The answer lies in a culture that spends on cable t.v., junk food, and looking "nice" rather than investing in the future

---

Now of course  millions of African Americans have personally decided to choose a positive path that diverges from the above.

Guess what!

They have on balance and in general succeeded in the American dream better than tens of millions of whites!

They have home loans, cars, go on vacation, their children are prospering in school, they have savings, etc.

They are CEO's, principals, business people, athletes, doctors, lawyers, etc.

Each one of them will tell you that they worked hard.  That they sacrificed their "yesterday" for a "tomorrow".

Obama is trying to a way to say this and still  be "black enough".

I respect his effort.  It is a noble one.

He knows that a country that allowed him to go to Ivy league schools, write books, get elected to the U.S. Senate, and now make him the front runner in the POTUS election is a fundamentally good country.

So the trick is to express the same sentiments of Bill Cosby, and many other black leaders including Farrakhan, and yes Jesse Jackson, without losing the "black" label he needs to win.

I think obama has calculated that he can tell the truth and not fear any trouble in this election because of its' significance.

I hope Obama goes even further.

Imagine if he focuses on the thousands of murder victims and other innocent injuries due to the hands of mostly young black men in the A.A. community.  He should make the case that the Civil Rights Movement has worked in terms of larger society, and that we as a community must demand to those among us to stop acting as if they were the racist ones by their criminal and backward looking behavior.

He could always mention every other line that he still supports a role for "policy" so everyone will feel a little better.

America is the greatest nation ever created.  This is especially true for black people.

btw.  this is true whether he wins or not.

On Friday, July 11, The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) closed the $32 billion IndyMac Bank, headquartered in Pasadena, California, and transferred operations to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

My Mom, who is 88 years old, has a CD at Indymac Bank.  She lives off the interest. Thanks to the Democratic Party and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, my Mom didn't lose her money when the feds seized the  bank in the second largest federal takeover in US history.  I haven't told my Mom about the takeover. She has Alzheimer's. If you can't figure out how to find the bologna in the refrigerator I figure you can go without knowing you almost got wiped out financially.

I, on the otherhand, am a wreck. I got her into Indymac! For years they paid the highest CD rate around--if you opened it online. Whoohoo. I've even  got a little money stashed  there.

The woman I talked to at Indymac today--who works for the FDIC--said people have been weeping on the phone. They had more deposited there than the FDIC will insure. If you are above $100,000 that money is out the door.

I was speechless on Friday. When I could put two words back to back they were x-rated:

 Holy fu*king shit! What a fu*king disaster. Jesus H. Chist, Dad, you were right. I mean you were RIGHT!!!.

And then --even though he has been gone for 10 years-- I whispered:

Thanks.

It was my Dad when  I was 18 who drummed the FDIC into my head with tales of the Great Depression and how people were wiped out and jumped from skyscrapers. And then he would explain how FDR and the Democrats fixed it so if the banks failed again, no one would be wiped out.

But c'mon, banks fail?? I didn't think it could happen again. And I certainly flirted over the years with money ventures and institutions that were not FDIC insured. But my Dad really pounded something into my thick head. Why flirt with disaster when the Democratic Party has provided a safety net? Over and over, in countless different ways he brought the point home.

Why? For a little extra money--you could lose it all. Stick with the FDIC. You'll be fine. Don't color outside the lines, Ok?

I'd nod my head, bored and despairing of his interminable lectures. Now, I find out that  these lectures from my depression era papa shaped my behavior with Indymac.And so my Mom and I are among those who are lucky this Monday.

Many others are not.

I supported Hillary Clinton for the nomination for the Democratic Party, and a cast of sore losers--unlike the woman they profess to support who has been gracious in defeat-- cannot understand why I now support the Dem nominee, Barack Obama. It is so fuc*king simple. It ain't the head of the party that matters above all else. It is the Party!!!

And I am living proof right now today that the Party matters.  Ok. Sure. The dem leadership hasn't been exactly angelic in the primary struggle. But I will take this party and these "fu*k-ups" over the Republicans any day.

Remember, it was Herbert Hoover who fired on the vets when the marched on the White House demanding their pay. And this is the same party that has backed our Coward in Chief from showing the coffins of our soldiers as they come home in body bags from Iraq.

Hillary knows what is at stake in this election. In Chicago Saturday for the American Federation of Teachers conference, she said:

The Republicans should hold a press conference and apologize to the country and say they're just not going to run anyone for president.

I am newly grateful to the Democratic Party today. And I urge you to think of this Party and it's long and grand tradition of standing up for the rights and welfare of working people. The Republicans for the last eight years have done nothing but gut every protection they could get their hands on.

Isn't it time to put the Party back in power that brought us the FDIC.  

Today I have read diaries that have told me I don't have the right to complain about sexism because there are more important issues than sexism.

They say if I complain about "ho" jokes at a Democratic fundraiser I am being divisive and frivolous. Sexism is divisive. Those who engage in it and defend it are the problem, not me. "Ho" jokes are anti-woman and anti-feminist especially during a political event. Democratic women don't be fooled or intimidated by those who attempt to convince you otherwise. Don't be fooled by those who dismiss your equality to re-fighting the primary.

As a Democratic woman, I have chosen to fight for my equality and not vote for the Democratic nominee. I will not be bullied into voting for a man who will benefit from the sexism unleashed and/or unchecked by the Democratic Party against the woman candidate. Sexism has become a part of the winning strategy, just as race became a part of Nixon's southern strategy.

Look at Obama's short list for Vice President.  Someone who gets great press coverage from the msm is Tim Kaine.  His latest proposal in Virgina:

Raise taxes to pay for transportation projects
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/06/19/AR2008061902104. html

Before Kaine another hot prospect for V.P.  former
VA governor Mark Warner whose signature budget included $1.5 billion in increased taxes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Warner

If Obama gets elected his signature budget is a tax increase on some Americans though he also pushes for $80 billion in tax cuts for lower and middle income

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/18/o bama.taxplan/index.html

---
Right now it seems to be working.  It worked in Virginia, and has worked throughout the states where Democrats are on a rise.

But why won't Democrats be Liberal in their thinking  on tax policy and find ways to raise revenue or cut spending that alleviates the need to raise taxes?

Our budget is  in the trillions of dollars federally,and billions in the states.  Surely we can cut some programs that aren't working as well as they could.  Surely we can sacrifice for a more worthy goal.

I propose that we radically reshape the way we think about taxes.
Transfer the sytem to an Auction type process.

For instance:

Each year there are events/items that are guaranteed to be high in demand/low in supply.  They range from a local level such as:

the best spots to see fireworks at a public park
waiting in line at the motor vehicles station

to sports:
superbowl tickets
big college football events
NCAA Final Four

to shopping:
each year items like the Apple Iphone
hot Christmas Items
blockbuster movies

all sell-out.

The government could get 10% of these type of items/tickets and auction them off to the public.  They could ban any other "scalping" and have a monopoly.  

This way, the money raised could go for taxes and would be paid by people willingly.  

The government could then set-up how much revenue they needed, and let an indepedent board raise the funds in the private sector.

The list of events/items that could be auctioned is endless.

------

But the value of the idea is that it de-links Democrats' ideas to help people and raising taxes.

I also wish Democrats would start cutting some Government Programs once they outlive their usefullness or either just plain don't work.

I support "big government" as it is derisively called because the private sector though the best mechanism to organize a society, can't do many things well.

Government should ensure:

healthcare for all
great education for all
protection from enemies/criminals
fair justice system
safe place to live/prosper

This doesn't mean we have to raise taxes every time we get in power.

First we can cut government.
Seond, we can find new ways to raise revenue.

Barack Obama states his support for FISA is a "good compromise".  Apparently, a majority of the Senate (and the House, let's remember) think so, too.  For an examination of the compromise, please watch the following:

American political anylists and commentators love the horse race aspect of elections, after all what's more exciting than watching a race that could have an important impact on your life.  Obviously, a horse race needs at least two horses to be interesting and it could be argued that all the pundits are really analyzing a one horse race.

On July 4 I marched with volunteers and staff for Jerry Sullivan, Democratic candidate in Iowa House district 59.

We don't hear much about state legislative races on national blogs, because it would be overwhelming to keep up with what's going on all over the country.

But you should get involved on behalf of a good Democrat running for your state's Assembly, House or Senate. Here's why.

1. The 2010 census looms.

Looking at states like Florida, Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, Republicans hold more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than they "should" have if you consider the statewide strength of Democrats and Republicans. One big reason is that Republicans dominated those states' legislatures during the last round of redistricting.

If you want an enduring Democratic majority and you live in a state with multiple Congressional districts, you should focus on getting more Democrats in the legislature.

2. Many policy matters are determined at the state level.

Even if Democrats already control your state legislature, I'll bet there aren't enough progressives working on some of the environmental, labor or election reform issues you care about.

In the Iowa legislature, clean elections reform and regulation of confined-animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are among the many issues that our Democratic leadership refuses to move forward.

The difference between a slim Democratic majority and a solid Democratic majority could make or break key legislative initiatives in the next two years.

In 2007, a "fair share" bill that would have strengthened unions in this right-to-work state didn't have enough support to clear the Iowa House. If we increase the Democratic majority from the current 53 seats (out of 100) to 55 or 57 seats, perhaps that bill could advance.

3. Getting progressive Democrats elected to state legislatures will build our bench for future House, Senate or gubernatorial races.

Candidates who have served in the legislature are often more knowledgeable on a range of policy issues. They are more seasoned on the campaign trail. They may also have good name recognition and contacts with the key political journalists in your state.

4. You probably can find a competitive statehouse race near you, no matter where you live.

Maybe you're in a state where the outcome of the presidential race is predetermined, and there are no competitive Congressional districts.

I'm betting you wouldn't have to go far to find some good Democrat facing a tough contest.

For example, let's say you live in Iowa City or Cedar Rapids. Barack Obama is heavily favored to win Iowa's electoral votes for reasons I discuss here. U.S. Senator Tom Harkin is getting a pass; his challenger has very little money or name recognition. Congressman Dave Loebsack represents your strongly Democratic district (D+7) in an area where Obama will have huge coattails. So, where should you volunteer?

Nate Willems, a former regional director for Howard Dean and occasional contributor to MyDD, is trying to hold House district 29, covering parts of Linn County and Johnson County. Longtime Democratic incumbent Ro Foege is retiring.

Eric Palmer, a freshman incumbent from Oskaloosa, could use your help in House district 75. The Republican he beat in 2006 is trying to win his seat back.

Elesha Gayman is another good freshman legislator. She narrowly defeated a two-term incumbent in House district 84, which is fairly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

Palmer and Gayman are among five Democratic representatives in Iowa who have been targeted this year in corporate-funded radio and television commercials.

Swati Dandekar, current representative for House district 36, is trying to win Senate district 18, which has been held for a long time by retiring Republican Mary Lundby. That district includes a large area in Linn County.

If you're lucky, some blogger in your own state has compiled a handy list of the battleground districts. Otherwise, get active on your state community blog for Democrats and ask for advice on where to volunteer.

If you live near a state border, you may want to help a worthy Democrat in a neighboring state.

5. Your individual actions are more likely to make a difference in a statehouse race.

By all means, donate to and volunteer for Obama's campaign if you are inspired to do so, especially if you live in a competitive state.

But your money and volunteer energy will go further in a short-staffed legislative race.

Also, if you are considering a political career, either as a candidate or a campaign staffer, you will get more hands-on experience with a variety of tasks if you volunteer for a statehouse candidate.

You may think that Obama will give down-ticket candidates all the help they need in November. But depending on where you live, the Obama campaign may not be putting its GOTV muscle in the crucial legislative districts.

I was very concerned to learn a few days ago that the Iowa Democratic Party has in effect shut down its "coordinated campaign" and transferred control over GOTV statewide to the Obama campaign.

What's best for maximizing Obama's presidential vote is not necessarily what's best for maximizing the number of Democrats elected to the state legislature. For instance, Obama's field plan for Johnson County and Linn County might focus on student precincts in Iowa City and urban precincts in Cedar Rapids.

However, we need strong GOTV efforts in other parts of Linn and Johnson Counties if we want to elect Willems in House district 29 or Dandekar in Senate district 18.

I have no idea whether the Obama campaign's field plan for Polk County will focus on the precincts we need to elect Jerry Sullivan in House district 59.

Since I see little chance of John McCain winning Iowa's electoral votes, I would rather spend my volunteer time on competitive districts. Whether Obama wins Iowa by 5 percent or 10 percent is less important than getting more and better Democrats in the Iowa House and Senate.

I look forward to reading your comments on this topic. Also, please take the poll after the jump.