by Nancy in Cali, Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 07:14:06 AM EST
As the San Diego Union Tribune pointed out today. Hillary Clinton is now the ONLY Presidential Candidate left in the race that supports mandatory Universal Health care for all Americans, leaving no one out of her plan.
I'll go one step further and say, imo, she is the ONLY REAL Democrat left in this race.
by fbihop, Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 07:36:25 PM EST
Originally posted at New Mexico FBIHOP
We can transform this economy, we can transform this country, we can transform this world.
- Sen. Barack Obama in Albuquerque
Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama stopped by for a visit to New Mexico. And this wasn't some ten-minute airport rally. He went to Albuquerque's Kiva Auditorium for an Economic Summit (which I attended) and was headed up to Santa Fe for another event.
I have to say, there was a palpable mood of excitement at the Albuquerque event. The doors to the event opened at 11:30, and the event was slated to begin at 1:15. I arrived to the Convention Center (where the Kiva Auditorium is located), and the line was already out the door. The line began on the second floor by the Kiva entrance, snaked through Ballroom A, down the stairs, snaked throughout the downstairs overflow room, out the other doors to the overflow room, out the outside doors and along the street.
There were a lot of people. And not just young people. There were those too young to vote, those old enough to have voted for Carter. There were black, there were white, there were hispanic. It was not a homogeneous crowd; it was a truly New Mexican crowd. All told, the event filled up the 2300-seat Kiva Auditorium, the massive overflow rooms set up with two large screens and there were still a thousand people waiting to get in. Truly an impassioned crowd ready to see Obama.
Read more about the event below.
by apolitik, Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 11:47:21 AM EST
Is it just me or does the Huffington Post seem awfully skewed lately towards Obama? One quick look through their politics page mentions 2 Clinton and 1 Edwards new pieces. At the same time there are 9 headlines concerning Obama, mostly effusing with praise. For instance...look at the main page of the Huffington Post and the politics page of the Post and you see these two headlines.
Teddy Echoes JFK: "The World Is Changing...The Old Ways Will Not Do"
by bruh21, Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:35:33 AM EST
Let me just say that for a short while I flirted with the idea of changing candidates. Like many, I can be influenced by the media, and I was possibly leaning to Clinton after the last several weeks becoming disenchanted with Obama.
Now, however, I am firmly returning to my support of Edwards. Here's why: If progressives/liberals want to start creating strategies that will defeat triangulation, that means we must step out on to the plank to support progressive/liberal values. By doing so, win or lose, we get a seat at the table. By having a seat at the table we start to shift the balance leftward. We can't do that if we simply give into to impulse.
I write this with no illusion that Edwards will win. That's not the point. The point is that he can influence the other two candidates, and force them, as he did at the debate to return to substance, and, he can be, in effect, become the honest broker as he has done throughout the primary cycle. When looking at this, I realized his strategic value: He can help reduce, even if he does not win, triangulation at least until the convention, and if he is king/queen maker, maybe he can help put a stake in its heart. Presidencies are also the people who surround them. How much better would Obama be if he were force to include Robert Reich rather than the right wing economic advisors he has now? How much better would clinton be not surrounded by Mark Penn? I don't know- but maybe with a bit of deal making we can find out. We can win even while losing. This is just a modest idea.
by bruh21, Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 02:19:50 PM EST
I've had an instructive conversation today with Piuma about race. At first, I assumed merely didn't understand the definition of 'magic negro' when referencing it as a rightwing term.
In fact, I was corrected as to my thinking by the following comment:
"Try actually listening for once. I understand it is a perception of what blacks think whites are thinking. It is a perception of racial bias which relies on stereotyping. It is a form of racial bias itself which takes a cinematic device for the "unexpected stranger" (see Pasolini's Teorama) and imposes it on social interaction without merit. Perceived racism is not always accurate, nor ultimately helpful.
It has been used by the right wing, Limbaugh etc. , to belittle Liberals and others who seek to break down the institutional barriers of racism, and has been used specifically against Obama as being just white enough for white America to embrace, a safe black man, which really seeks put forward just the opposite thought in his listeners and continue racism in this country."
If this is how some white voters supporting Obama thinks, then his coalition is going to face a problem when African Americans come to terms with your thoughts on race. The key words here are "Perceived racism." Not real mind you, perceived.