by KnoxVow, Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 11:37:25 AM EST
Geraldine Ferraro gave a thumbs down to Caroline Kennedy's bid for the Senate yesterday - even as the Camelot daughter won her biggest endorsement for the job, The Post has learned.
I am very pleased to see Geraldine coming out against Caroline Kennedy. She has shunned the public (or rather ordinary folks and the press) for years and now she wants Hillary's Senate seat handed to her on a silver platter?
All because she's a Kennedy. RFK, Jr. is so much more qualified than her. But his downside with the powers that be is, he endorsed Hillary. Well, welcome to American Politics 101. The old-style, Clinton, work-your-heart-out politics is sooo passè. The only requirements for acceptance into the club now are:
1) Family name
- Who you know
Pre-ordained politicians is the new "hopey-changey." Earning and working your way up is out.
"You can't send someone down there who doesn't know the issues," Ferraro told The Post. "If you send someone down there who doesn't know the legislative process, they'll get chewed up alive."
"Our senator should be ready on Day 1," added Ferraro. "Just knowing people down there [in Washington, DC]? It's just not enough."
She is not ready but the MSM wants to convince people that she is. Caroline isn't getting the sexist treatment from the media either. Why is that?
Face it, our journalists are a bunch of snobs who can't stand it when people from uncool places like Arkansas or Alaska outshine them. They are perfectly willing to overlook flaws of people from the in crowd. This, not ideology or principle, is the source of their bias. Caroline IS PAYING TO PLAY -- she's getting the seat with the promise of how much money she can raise from her socialite friends. She's a DNC fund-raising machine and they know it.
Historical circumstances is not a good enough reason to assume that any member of the Kennedy clan is ready to lead, or more importantly deserves an appointment of national significance. Senator of NY is no small thing.Caroline Kennedy is not proving herself impressive in making her case to the public. If she gets the appointment anyway, most people will know why: political payback.
by KnoxVow, Thu Dec 18, 2008 at 08:58:05 PM EST
Masslib over at alegre's corner made a great point.
Here is the link :http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/
I have taken a peek at several progressive blogs today and am astounded at the number of morons who actually argue that the "Warren pick" for the inauguration ceremonies is some kind of brilliant move by Obama. It's not. It's cheesy and frankly, ridiculous. Rick Warren has a big microphone and I can sort of understand that Democrats participated in his events and debates. I can not fathom inviting him to your event. It's not just that Warren is an anti-woman, anti-gay zealot, though that is quite enough. For me, as a Christian, I abhor guys like Warren who corrupt Christ's platform to enrich themselves. But, whatever, Warren is a cheese ball mega-church clown. He's to religion as Oprah is to "women's issues".
Obama's choice of Warren juxtaposed against 20 years of Rev. Wright is one of the most utterly bizarre expressions of "judgment" I have ever seen from BO.
Underlining both choices is a Dire wolf.
It's teeth gnashing relentlessly at the carcass and bones of what was the moral fiber of this nation. From the Holocaust comments of Warren to AIDS comments of Wright.
What BO has done is never what he says. People went to the polls knowing this and voted for a Dire Wolf dressed in Democratic clothing. You know those folks that voted for party before country and common sense? Or the ones that said "Anyone but Bush!" (and Senator Clinton) Ouch! Reality hurts.
How about Obama who did not actively campaign against prop 8? Would Obama have lost California by advocating strongly against prop 8? I suspect he would not have. Leaders are supposed to argue for particular views, not simply get two opposing forces on the same stage in some faux show of inclusion toward the intolerant. It's the former that changes opinions, NOT the latter.
There is nothing brilliant about Obama inviting Mr. Warren to give the benediction at his inaugural ceremony. It's just politics and its cynical politics at that. Finally, again, guys like Rick Warren have NOT been excluded from the debate about this generation's biggest civil rights battle, namely marriage equality, or frankly, any other. Indeed, for too long they have been the ones shaping the debate. A show of inclusion would have been to include Gene Robinson to preside over the benediction, not asking a chief excluder to conduct the event.
The Rick Warren pick is in many ways small potatoes in the battle for marriage equality, but it certainly sets the wrong tone, at a time when indeed, state by state, court by court, generation to generation, those on the side of tolerance and civil rights ARE winning this battle.
Would be great to see Rev Wright on the same stage as Warren!!! Maybe he'll jump out and say "BOO!" at the last minute. For the record, I don't disagree with most of what Wright had to say. That whole kerfluffle was the biggest bunch of baloney during the whole campaign. People that can see through the MSM bullshit know that Obama -by proxy of Wright and the charasmatic african american pastoral tradition- was sandbagged by the same folks that called for the impeachment of Clinton, the swiftboating of Kerry and the framing of Siegleman. They are the real enemies here, and the actual voices of hate that should be shut out.
by KnoxVow, Wed Dec 17, 2008 at 12:27:06 PM EST
That didn't take long. Why is anybody surprised? Obama has always been against civil rights.
When asked to specifically define his views on marriage, Obama has stated that he believes "that marriage is the union between a man and a woman.""Now, for me as a Christian, it's also a sacred union. God's in the mix," he added.
I guess now that he is POTUS he doesn't need teh gays.
Aretha Franklin and Dr. Rick Warren, an evangelical minister of the Saddleback Church, are among the select group of people who will participate in Barack Obama's inaugural swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 20.
I thought Obama was a progressive. Looks like he condones homophobia and rewards people who practice discrimination against the GBLT community. This is disgusting and everybody who voted for this man should be ashamed of him.Instead of attacking me, answer the question. After you do that go to http://www.change.org/ and let Obama know what you think about this sickening choice.