:: I Told You So

Welcome to the real world, Barack

And so it begins. The press, its bloodlust for Hillary sated after the frenzy of dancing on her (purported) grave, turns its attention to Barack.

Last night, my dear mother called to tell me that Bill Maher's crowd was ripping Obama to shreds (why she was watching Bill Maher, I do not know). "You should turn it on right now," she said. "They are saying all the things you told me they would say."

Well, she is my mom.

But apparently Maher's crowd hit the high notes - Barack's arrogance, presumptuousness with regard to soul-saving, lack of experience, statement about sitting down with Castro II, lack of patriotism, his bitchy wife, and so on.

The New York Times has two columns that are perfect illustrations - close up, and in detail - of how the worm turns.

Today, Bill Kristol offers "Its All About Him," an homage to Barack's arrogance and lack of substance.

Last October, a reporter asked Barack Obama why he had stopped wearing the American flag lapel pin that he, like many other public officials, had been sporting since soon after Sept. 11. Obama could have responded that his new-found fashion minimalism was no big deal. What matters, obviously, is what you believe and do, not what you wear.

But Obama chose to present his flag-pin removal as a principled gesture. “You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.”

Leave aside the claim that “speaking out on issues” constitutes true patriotism. What’s striking is that Obama couldn’t resist a grandiose explanation. Obama’s unnecessary and imprudent statement impugns the sincerity or intelligence of those vulgar sorts who still choose to wear a flag pin. But moral vanity prevailed. He wanted to explain that he was too good — too patriotic! — to wear a flag pin on his chest.

Now, Kristol is evil, I know. But he makes a valid point that Obama's kumbaya suporters have failed to grasp thusfar - Obama self-aggrandizing rhetoric paints everyone who is not on board with him as part of the problem. If you don't support Obama - if, for example, you support Hillary - you are against change, you are part of the machine, you don't care about the issues, you are a war monger, you are corrupt, and so on. Obama's campaign has gone negative since Day One.

To switch to lit-crit language, Obama created his in-group by casting Hillary as the "Other." The press was only too happy to concur. Feminists have been the "Other" for as long as they've existed.

Now that the press has written off Hillary, the in-group fractures. Without anti-Hillaryism to bind them together, the press no longer knows what it ever saw in the Obamanation.

Kristol says this about Michelle Obama's idiotic "patriotism" comment:

For as she had argued in the Wisconsin speech, America’s illness goes far beyond a flawed political process: “Barack knows that at some level there’s a hole in our souls.” This was a variation of language she had used earlier on the campaign trail: “Barack Obama is the only person in this race who understands that, that before we can work on the problems, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation.”

But they can be repaired. Indeed, she had said a couple of weeks before, in Los Angeles: “Barack Obama ... is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.”

So we don’t have to work to improve our souls. Our broken souls can be fixed — by our voting for Barack Obama. We don’t have to fight or sacrifice to help our country. Our uninvolved and uninformed lives can be changed — by our choosing Barack Obama. America can become a nation to be proud of — by letting ourselves be led by Barack Obama.

[Seriously, I try to shield myself from this - but - our souls? This is what the Obama campaign has been telling people?]

Notice Kristol's use of the pronouns "us," "our" and "we"? "Us" used to be "us folk who hate Hillary." Now a new dynamic is in play.

Kristol finishes with a nicely encapsulated preview of GOP message strategy.

Barack Obama is an awfully talented politician. But could the American people, by November, decide that for all his impressive qualities, Obama tends too much toward the preening self-regard of Bill Clinton, the patronizing elitism of Al Gore and the haughty liberalism of John Kerry?

It’s fitting that the alternative to Obama will be John McCain. He makes no grand claim to fix our souls. He doesn’t think he’s the one everyone has been waiting for. He’s more proud of his country than of himself. And his patriotism has consisted of deeds more challenging than “speaking out on issues.”

Job 1 - paint Obama as another typical Democrat, combining the worst qualities of Bill Clinton (vain, huckster), Al Gore (liar, wimp) and John Kerry (elitist snob).

Job 2 - draw contrast with the honorable, modest war hero John McCain.

Kristol's column comes on the heels of Maureen Dowd's "Quien Es Mas Macho." And here's a surprise....she finds him to be so ickily.... feminine! [Her job, apparently, is to cast Democratic presidential nominees as the feminine to the GOP's masculine, the mommy versus the daddy.] Apparently Hillary is more manly than Obama (a shift from the previous "Hillary is too manly"). Here she goes...

At first in Austin, Hillary did not channel Jane Austen. She tried once more to cast Obama as a weak sister on his willingness to talk to Raúl Castro.

Obama tapped into his inner chick and turned the other cheek. To cheers, he said, "I think that it’s important for us, in undoing the damage that has been done over the last seven years, for the president to be willing to take that extra step."

and

Like a prudent housekeeper, Obama spent the cash he raised — including from his continuing relationships with small donors — far more shrewdly, on ads rather than on himself.

You get the picture. Dowd is a master (mistress) of sexist jujitsu.

I'd feel badly about all this, if I hadn't been at National airport yesterday where I saw a prominent display of Hillary "nutcrackers" for sale. These are the figurines of Hillary with a metal, toothed nutcracker in place of a crotch. The box says "What Did You Expect?" and they are sold along with a bag of walnuts. When I suggested to the woman behind the counter that these were wildly offensive, she replied with that most American of statements,

"Well, people are buying them."

Well, people buy a lot of things, don't they. Including the words of Kristol and Dowd.

Obama and his boys brigade of campaign strategists thought they could harness sexism and prejudice to their own advantage. As it happens, the joke is on them.

Read more!

:: Screw You Guys - I'm Going Home

Obama's campaign has become part of the problem, not the solution... and I'm not going to let it slide.

I’ve haven’t posted comments anywhere for a while, not only because my foster dog ate the internet, but because I’m sick of the Obamamites. However a comment I saw today on http://www.pollster.com/ really inspired me. The comment was this:

As a under 50,000, 50 year old part of the throw away class of women you are speaking of, let me just reassure you I am college educated and I can recognize a load of male bullcrap when I hear it I will not be voting dem if your dream guy get the nomination. Oh and by the way I have never voted for a rep before, but; I guess there is always a first time. Posted by: vera t February 21, 2008 10:45 PM

This really struck a chord with me. I think its also in line with Buffy's post about "invisible women." In response, I wrote:

"I just want to express my appreciation to Vera T for her comment about being "part of the throw away class of women" in this election. That is EXACTLY how I feel.

I noticed last night that once again, Obama mentioned the need to inspire the American people to "go beyond the racial divisions and the religious divisions and the regional divisions.” He seemed to go out of his way to not mention gender (just like, for example, in his MLK day speech when he mentioned racism, “occasional” anti-semitism, homophobia but not misogyny or sexism).

Now the party line from Obama supporters is the Hillary should drop out, despite the fact that the two candidates are running neck-and-neck.

Clearly, the votes, values and interests of people like myself (and Vera T) do not matter to the Obama campaign, nor to the most outspoken Obama supporters. This has been demonstrated in a number of ways, from the content (or lack thereof) of his speeches, to the content (or lack thereof) of his website, and in the strategy that says the votes of my cohort basically don't exist or shouldn’t count.

I have been involved in Democratic politics for my entire career, working exclusively as paid staff for progressive interest groups and Democratic candidates. And I say this now from my heart, not as some sort of veiled threat, but absolutely from my heart - I honestly think that if Obama is the nominee my protest will be to not vote in the general.

Over the course of this campaign, I've heard Hillary's experience minimized and ridiculed, heard every comment parsed for even a hint of exaggeration, I've seen her denigrated for her clothes and her laugh, I've seen her accused of using "feminine wiles" by "turning on the water works" when the fact is she never shed a tear on the campaign trail, I've heard my own vote denigrated as mere sympathy rather than fact- and value-based, I’ve heard Hillary’s daughter called a whore by a prominent newscaster for campaigning with her mother (but nary a word about Mitt’s boys) (believe me, if that newscaster had said Barack was “pimping out” Michelle, he’d be fired and NO ONE would be coming to his defense). I’ve heard Hillary called “ambitious” as if there is something wrong with that, while the obviously equally ambitious male candidates are not criticized. I could go on and on. And who raises a protest? No one. Does Obama say one word about fair play? Never. Is he the beneficiary and sometimes the instigator of this unequal treatment? Obviously.

I'm not going to go into the ways misogyny permeates our culture. I've traveled and lived outside of the United States and I've observed overseas development programs that address gender inequality, so I know whereof I speak. Many countries have national programs that address, for example, violence and discrimination against womenand programs that make it easier for women (and men) to accommodate work and family. Not here. Here, apparently, no one beyond Hillary and her supporters think this is a problem. And no one, outside of Hillary and her supporters, thinks this is worth addressing.

Call my opinion irrelevant, or see me (and Vera T) as canaries in the coal mine. Not only do I not have any enthusiasm for Obama, but I've come to see his campaign as part of the problem. I’m sorry to say it, but as for this longtime Dem activist and one of the “throw away women,” if Obama is the nominee, you boys are on your own."

Before you say it - I know. The Supreme Court. Our foreign policy. The environment. I know, I know. But you know what? I'm sick of it. I'm not going to compromise my principles this time. We survived 8 years of Bush, we'll survive whatever happens next. The fact is, I don't think Obama will be able to beat McCain anyway (I heard MULTIPLE things come out of Obama's mouth in last night's debate that would make excellent negative ads against him). And I'm not sure Obama would be much better than McCain on a lot of issues. Obama has already ceded universal health care. We don't know whether he'd appoint a strongly pro-choice Supreme Court justice, or a "moderate" that appeals to both parties. He has no experience whatsoever in foreign policy - who knows what he could get us into.

And I don't think the Democratic Senate will treat the young new guy any better this time than the Democratic Senate did in 1992 - 1994 with the young new guy Bill Clinton. The first time he doesn't jump when Teddy tells him to, he'll get clobbered. Furthermore, I think he'll reap a whirlwind from the conservatives that will make the vast right-wing conspiracy against the Clintons look like nothing.

If Obama's the nominee, I'm going to take a cue from his campaign and vote with my heart - and my heart says stay home.

Read more!

:: Thanks, Daisy

You will experience a brief disruption of service.

No blogging for a while; nor any posting: no internet at home.

Why, you ask? Because a certain foster dog decided to escape from her crate and redecorate our spare bedroom. She tore it down, and then she tore it up. She pulled the cable out of the wall and chomped it. She pulled the cable box off its wall-mount, and the ethernet cable with it. She crunched the connectors. She ripped and chewed through (not necessarily in that order) the power cord to her portable heater. She dragged boxes and chairs around. She "dug up" the wool rug and left it in a heap. She did unspeakable things to her crate. She knocked furniture over. Curiously, she left a rabbit-shaped plush toy unscathed but for a little drool. I'm sure it was just an oversight. She was a very busy girl.

Scientist-at-Large wondered how she chewed through so many electrical wires without getting shocked. For all we know, she may have been zapped unconscious any number of times, only to rise again to finish the job.

All Hail, Satan's Little Redecorator.

Read more!

:: Love, EU-Style

A special Valentine’s Day investigation from the European Parliament’s news service.

They can ask this sort of thing and come away unscathed… I shudder to think of what we’d learn if we asked equivalent questions to our members of Congress – well, the GOP ones, anyway.

...(A guide to the acronyms and abbreviations is at the end of this post)...

Love may be as important as the air we breathe but talking about love is not always the easiest topic. We usually leave it to poets and singers, and not to politicians. But on the occasion of St. Valentine's Day, 14 February, a day celebrated in many parts of Europe, perhaps they too can have their say. With some trepidation, we spoke to some MEPs about love.

1. If there was a European Charter for Love, what should be in it?

Katalin Lévai (PES, HU), author of the bestseller "Pillow-book": Mutual understanding and respect. Love is not only about sensual pleasures, but it is also about a spiritual and intellectual togetherness, otherwise desire dwindles away. Frédérique Ries (ALDE, BE): Please, no charter! Love is allergic to paragraphs and annexes.

Christofer Fjellner (EPP-ED, SV): Love should not be bound by any borders; any more than goods, services, capital or people.

Zita Plestinská (EPP-ED, SK): Love never fails. If we managed to put this idea into practise, the world would become much nicer. Then the Charter could replace many EP resolutions.

Henrik Lax (ALDE, FI): Live with your loved one as if every day you are together could be your last.

Genowefa Grabowska (PES, PL): There should be no age limit...nor should it contain any sanctions. It has to be based on persuasion and faith...Maybe the Slovenian presidency could introduce a Charter of Love.

Roberta Alma Anastase (EPP-ED, RO): Nowadays, people do not use the word love in public speeches, however, our existence is based on feelings, particularly on love. The European Union is a space where thoughts, feelings, attitudes are encouraged to flourish openly. I think this charter already exists and it is to be found in every one of us.

2. Would you like to share any good tips about romance and love?

Katalin Lévai: Be sincere from the very beginning. The one who acts a role will eventually fall.

Astrid Lulling (EPP-ED, LUX): You cannot organise or plan romance and love. It happens or it does not!

Frédérique Ries: For eternal love, admire and be admired and surprise, always. Boredom poisons love.

Genowefa Grabowska: The more you love the more you expose yourself to suffering. But suffering enriches us. Every grandmother has a drawer full of advice because she has been in love so many times. But her granddaughters will never listen to her, because they would prefer to learn from their own experience.

Henrik Lax: Enjoy the romance, but do not take any serious life decisions until you know whether it is love or something else.

3. What "says it best" on Valentine's Day: chocolate, flowers or something else?

Roberta Alma Anastase: Chocolate and flowers are good, especially if mixed. However, the most important thing is to be sure the person you love is there for you.

Katalin Lévai: A good book is the most valuable of all, if it is accompanied by a flower, then my heart warms.

Genowefa Grabowska: If I was cynical and materialistic I would expect my husband to give me a red car, because I like red cars. But I am not, so what I would like to get is a red rose.

Frédérique Ries: Give yourself, that's the real present and not only on 14 February. Give your time, your imagination and your heart - there are infinite possibilities for wonderful surprises.

4. Are you planning to do anything special for Valentine's day?

Astrid Lulling: Valentine's Day only became fashionable when I was already over 40. But one can always dream, so why not hope that a good friend will take the initiative for a lovely surprise.

Christofer Fjellner: Yes, I will spend it with my girlfriend, Cecilia. Since I spend so much time in Brussels - and to much time in Strasbourg - spending time with her is always - in some way - special.

Henrik Lax: "No, I will be in Kiev, far from my wife whom I met 43 years ago. I will send my warmest thoughts and feelings to her and all my family.

Guide to acronyms and abbreviations: PES, Party of European Socialists (center left); ALDE, Alliance of Liberal Democrats (center right); EPP, European People's Party (right wing); HU, Hungary; SV, Sweden; SK, Slovakia; FI, Finland; PL, Poland; RO, Romania; LUX, Luxembourg.

Read more!

:: Invisible Woman

There has been some chatter lately about why a certain swath of the population really, really dislikes Hillary Clinton. I mean REALLY, to the point of distraction, without reason, dislikes a woman they have never met, who has never personally harmed them and who does not kill people or kick puppies. Stanley Fish spent several column inches detailing the kind of comments he gets when he opines about Hillary. It is the vicious and irrational nature of the comments that has him perplexed.

My mom has one explanation for the Hillary hatred. She thinks there is a huge latent discomfort, even hatred of Hillary Clinton, because she refuses to become invisible. Older women in our society, especially older white women, tend to fade into the background. They are no longer sex objects and are therefore supposed to take their rightful role as unobtrusive grandmothers. There are not many roles (or rules) for a woman who continues to be productive long after she has stopped reproducing.

She [Hillary] was never the "pretty" or "cute" one, and at this advanced age of hers as a woman, she has refused to become invisible. How dare she! She is going against the everybody-knows popular wisdom about what women in their 50's are supposed to be doing, looking like, saying. She is supposed to be INVISIBLE. And when someone, any age or gender, goes against what we know should be the proper role, it makes us uncomfortable. And when voters are uncomfortable, they instinctively vote NO. I've worked on many issue campaigns, everything from the ERA to zoning issues in a specific community, and the single consistent theme for something losing is the voter telling the pollster, "I just am uncomfortable voting for this...No, of course I don't understand it, but somehow or other it makes me uncomfortable; therefore I will be against it."

This phenomenon is not lost on the Clinton campaign – her very first campaign ad was titled Invisible. Read more!

:: Kate Michelman Jumps the Shark

Kate has a new pro-Obama statement, and its kinda freaky, in a pod-person sort of way...

Kate's new pro-Obama statement is, well, kind of weird.... see for yourself. Its called "Believing Again" (note: emphasis added and formatting condensed).

The question I have been asking myself and others during my entire life in public policy and throughout this 2008 presidential Campaign -- the question which tens of millions of women and men have also been asking -- is how do we best bring America together in shared purpose, prosperity and, especially, equality.

[snip]

[Like John Edwards] Barack Obama is also calling our nation to the greatness that we all want but that we're uncertain we can still achieve. Others talk about greatness and they even say all the right words, but they do not bring those words to life. Their words do not grab us by the arms and pull us along together.

[snip]

And when I endorsed John Edwards I also knew that Barack Obama shared every one of these concerns, and over the course of Barack's own campaign, the nation has come to believe in him just like I always have as well.

Senator Obama is not just prepared to lead ­ as our beloved Teddy and Caroline Kennedy have said, he is prepared to lead in a way different than we have seen for decades. Not out in front with us behind him, but rather with us beside him. And that difference is all the difference. That difference separates just any president from a great president; and right now, we need a great president.

Barack Obama will be that great president. He will bring us all together. And together, we will change our country. During these past many years, we have lost the sense of what we could do together, who we could be, what was possible. That's changing. And Barack Obama is the one changing that. With him, greatness is again within reach.

First of all, if she always believed in Barack, she should have endorsed him and not Edwards. I guess she just didn't believe in him enough.

Second, what is with the cult-language? I realize that "he will bring us all together" is a main campaign message, but coming from a woman who was at the nexus of one of our most intense (and sometimes violent) cultural conflicts, this sounds bizarre. I guess it depends on what she means by "us." If she's thinking "us" doesn't include the folks over at National Right to Life, the National Council of Catholic Bishops and the neanderthal base of the Republican party, okay maybe. Because I'm certain they're not going to jump into bed with Kate no matter what Barack tells them.

"With him, greatness is in reach" - she sounds like a televangelist or mega-church preacher. Does she really expect people to just swallow that without any specifications about what this "greatness" might entail? Annexing Poland and Czechoslovakia, perhaps?

Third, what is with that "our beloved Teddy and Caroline" crap? She's a hair's breadth (or hare's breath, if you like) from calling Barack our Dear Leader. When was the last time you heard any American call any living politician, in all seriousness, "our beloved"? Freaky.

Last, the most interesting part of her whole statement is this: Barack will lead "Not out in front with us behind him, but rather with us beside him." This, my dears, is the Big Clue. Kate sees herself as part of Barack's circle, in a favored position "beside him"; she wouldn't have such a place next to Hillary. Hillary doesn't need Kate to shore up her feminist credentials - she has her own achievements. But Barack - he needs Kate beside him. He makes her feel valuable. She is a bigger fish in that pond.

In other words, Kate has invalidated everything she preached while she ran NARAL. For years and years she told us that a solid record of standing up for women's rights was of paramount importance in deciding which candidate to support. Now, just because Barack made her feel good about herself, she has thrown away the ideals she championed throughout her career.

Kate is capping off her career by telling us that the principles she fought for aren't so important after all. What a sad way to slide into irrelevance. Read more!

:: Come Look

Check this out. It is really cute.

"I was like....... ..... .. why?" Love it. Read more!