Well, I have a crush on the babe that has a crush on Barack...
I know that all the political spotlights in the U.S. (and many abroad) are shining on New Hampshire right now, but I thought I would take a moment to revive Ho Hum and to reflect on my night in the spotlight. As an Iowan, I (we) were the center of attention for many a month. People I know from other states were constantly harrumphing about how stupid it is that a lame-ass state like Iowa gets its ass so thoroughly kissed by the candidates and the media, but they also don’t know what it’s like to get 10 phone calls and 30 pieces of mail a day for a couple of months. Granted, I did get an opportunity to see all the candidates, but only ended up seeing two of them (Edwards and Obama) in person, but if I had wanted to, or had time to, I could have went to the public library on many a day and chatted with Biden, Dodd, Richardson, or Kucinich. I also went to an Edwards rally that was opened by Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne. I’ve never been a big fan of either, but seeing them for free in a high school auditorium rocked (especially when Iris DeMent and local/national folks Greg Brown (now DeMent’s husband), Bo Ramsey, and Pieta Brown all joined them on stage for some 6 part harmony). That said, I got polled aplenty, and we all know how painful that can be.
I’ve heard some strong arguments against Iowa and New Hampshire always being first, and the best of those is the lack of diversity in both states, but then again, Obama kicked ass in Iowa, and probably is going to tonight in New Hampshire. One suggestion is rotating this position to other states, but I’m only for this if those states are not highly populated. Sound illogical to have the small states setting the tone for the rest of the country? Consider this, if all states had primaries/caucuses on the same day, no politician would bother with any state other than the big 15 in population. Also, instead of haunting libraries and having town hall meetings in which real conversation occurs, they would focus on sound bites and, due to the logistics of a larger state, campaign mainly from a distance through TV ads and automated phone calls (not that we didn’t get plenty of both). In short, while it sounds stupid to start framing the process in small, insignificant states, I think it ends up bettering the process.
As for caucusing (heh heh), it is an interesting process. The rest of the country mocks it, but I like it (overall). When I explained the process to my brother, he chimed in with a “that’s fucking stupid,” (being a man of literature and all). But I've done it twice and always end up having interesting conversations with people I didn't previously know. Somehow, an active, face-to-face process, with negotiation, seems more legit than the faceless voting (at least at this step). I went for Edwards, but was considering Obama. In our precinct, 765 people showed up (I'm sure a record) and more than half went for Obama. I felt pretty good about that. Of the remaining, Edwards got about 30 more than Hillary. None of the other candidates were viable (to see an in depth breakdown of the caucusing process, go here… once you’ve done it, it no longer seems so idiotic or strange). The thing I felt best about was that she was third (more about that later). That said, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat over any of those creepy republican candidates (what a bunch of thugs and/or bible thumpers...fancy that), which brings me to my current candidate analysis and why I voted for Edwards.
Of the viable candidates, two stood out to me, Edwards and Obama. I caucused for Edwards last time, and after hearing his fiery anti-corporate speeches this time, I related best to his rhetoric. Although I hate poles (no, not polish people, unless one is an asshole), all poles showed that Edwards would win handily against any of the republican candidates. I like Obama (how could I not?), but I was (am) nervous about the race angle and the name angle. I’m not nervous about democrats jumping ship over secret racism, I’m worried about swing voters (largely, idiots). Will swing voters, in the privacy of a voting booth, end up voting for a black man? I hope so, but back in my home town, I’m not so sure. Also, Barack Hussein Obama. I know it shouldn’t matter, but if his name was Jim Smith instead of Barack Obama, he would probably be on cruise control into the presidency. But having the middle name Hussein is really untimely.
Once again, it should not matter, but the republicans are all over it. There is already viral email claiming that he is part of a secret Muslim conspiracy to take over the U.S., and they cite as “evidence” the “fact” that when sworn into the senate he refused to swear on the bible and instead insisted on using the Quran. Of course, this isn’t true, in fact, it is (intentionally, I’m sure) confounded with another false story about our first openly Muslim (has their been any closet Muslims in office before?) congressman, Keith Ellison. Glen Beck (major terdsicle—or is that turdsicle? do weigh in—and complete blathering idiot) tried to make a big deal about Ellison being sworn in on the Quran instead of the bible (big fucking deal if he had), but actually, no members of congress are sworn in on the bible (thankfully). Though easily discounted as B.S., these confusions have worked for the republicans in the past, and the will again. I’m sure that many a swing voter’s head will swirl with all of the misinformation and plenty of acquired and inherent racism on voting day. When you go to an Obama rally, though, it is like going to a rock concert. The guy has charisma and charm by the bucketfuls, and that may (should) be enough to overcome the above issues. Obama seems to have dipped into the corporate well (including the pharmaceutical money), but I do think having a black president, with a multicultural, worldly background would be a huge step for this country. Also, while his name may be a liability (for getting elected) here, but in the rest of the world, it would be a real ice breaker.
Let me get back on track… why did I go for Edwards? Okay, there was the “he has the best chance of winning” thing, the liking of his anti-corporate rants, and my fears about Obama’s electability. Also, I thought Edwards populist message was being couched by the corporate media as “too angry.” Fuck that, he can’t be angry enough to appeal to me. Granted, I like Obama’s talk about working together and such, but I’m very pissed off about what’s been done to this country over the last 7 years by these evil thugs and I want action… I must say, though, it felt good when I saw chalky-white Iowa stand up strong for Obama and was not the least bit sad that my guy lost.
So who have I left out??? Oh, Hillary. I hate what the republican machine did to her during the Clinton presidency. They have fomented a level of hatred towards her that no one (except the operators of this machine) deserves. It continues today. I think the republicans really want her to win the nomination because they know they can beat her. It is hard to believe that any of the lame republican candidates could beat a democrat, but then again, look who’s in the Whitehouse. Before Obama’s surprising strong finish in Iowa, the media had pretty much appointed her the candidate. I think this is because she is the most knees-deep (neck-deep) in the corporate well and because they know they can beat her. They have created a scenario where, while a savvy and powerful figure, people have been taught to dislike her. Does she have the charisma of Obama, or even Edwards? No. But she is more appealing than given credit for, and she is a very capable person. But, there is a baseline dislike for her and that would allow Skeletor (Giuliani), or (gosh forbid) a square-jawed, fascist Mormon can gain traction and win the presidency. I’ll stop now and get back later (to those few of the Ho Hummers out there that stand more of it) after the New Hampshire result. My prediction? The beginning of the end of Hillary, and hello Barack.
I’ve heard some strong arguments against Iowa and New Hampshire always being first, and the best of those is the lack of diversity in both states, but then again, Obama kicked ass in Iowa, and probably is going to tonight in New Hampshire. One suggestion is rotating this position to other states, but I’m only for this if those states are not highly populated. Sound illogical to have the small states setting the tone for the rest of the country? Consider this, if all states had primaries/caucuses on the same day, no politician would bother with any state other than the big 15 in population. Also, instead of haunting libraries and having town hall meetings in which real conversation occurs, they would focus on sound bites and, due to the logistics of a larger state, campaign mainly from a distance through TV ads and automated phone calls (not that we didn’t get plenty of both). In short, while it sounds stupid to start framing the process in small, insignificant states, I think it ends up bettering the process.
As for caucusing (heh heh), it is an interesting process. The rest of the country mocks it, but I like it (overall). When I explained the process to my brother, he chimed in with a “that’s fucking stupid,” (being a man of literature and all). But I've done it twice and always end up having interesting conversations with people I didn't previously know. Somehow, an active, face-to-face process, with negotiation, seems more legit than the faceless voting (at least at this step). I went for Edwards, but was considering Obama. In our precinct, 765 people showed up (I'm sure a record) and more than half went for Obama. I felt pretty good about that. Of the remaining, Edwards got about 30 more than Hillary. None of the other candidates were viable (to see an in depth breakdown of the caucusing process, go here… once you’ve done it, it no longer seems so idiotic or strange). The thing I felt best about was that she was third (more about that later). That said, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat over any of those creepy republican candidates (what a bunch of thugs and/or bible thumpers...fancy that), which brings me to my current candidate analysis and why I voted for Edwards.
Of the viable candidates, two stood out to me, Edwards and Obama. I caucused for Edwards last time, and after hearing his fiery anti-corporate speeches this time, I related best to his rhetoric. Although I hate poles (no, not polish people, unless one is an asshole), all poles showed that Edwards would win handily against any of the republican candidates. I like Obama (how could I not?), but I was (am) nervous about the race angle and the name angle. I’m not nervous about democrats jumping ship over secret racism, I’m worried about swing voters (largely, idiots). Will swing voters, in the privacy of a voting booth, end up voting for a black man? I hope so, but back in my home town, I’m not so sure. Also, Barack Hussein Obama. I know it shouldn’t matter, but if his name was Jim Smith instead of Barack Obama, he would probably be on cruise control into the presidency. But having the middle name Hussein is really untimely.
Once again, it should not matter, but the republicans are all over it. There is already viral email claiming that he is part of a secret Muslim conspiracy to take over the U.S., and they cite as “evidence” the “fact” that when sworn into the senate he refused to swear on the bible and instead insisted on using the Quran. Of course, this isn’t true, in fact, it is (intentionally, I’m sure) confounded with another false story about our first openly Muslim (has their been any closet Muslims in office before?) congressman, Keith Ellison. Glen Beck (major terdsicle—or is that turdsicle? do weigh in—and complete blathering idiot) tried to make a big deal about Ellison being sworn in on the Quran instead of the bible (big fucking deal if he had), but actually, no members of congress are sworn in on the bible (thankfully). Though easily discounted as B.S., these confusions have worked for the republicans in the past, and the will again. I’m sure that many a swing voter’s head will swirl with all of the misinformation and plenty of acquired and inherent racism on voting day. When you go to an Obama rally, though, it is like going to a rock concert. The guy has charisma and charm by the bucketfuls, and that may (should) be enough to overcome the above issues. Obama seems to have dipped into the corporate well (including the pharmaceutical money), but I do think having a black president, with a multicultural, worldly background would be a huge step for this country. Also, while his name may be a liability (for getting elected) here, but in the rest of the world, it would be a real ice breaker.
Let me get back on track… why did I go for Edwards? Okay, there was the “he has the best chance of winning” thing, the liking of his anti-corporate rants, and my fears about Obama’s electability. Also, I thought Edwards populist message was being couched by the corporate media as “too angry.” Fuck that, he can’t be angry enough to appeal to me. Granted, I like Obama’s talk about working together and such, but I’m very pissed off about what’s been done to this country over the last 7 years by these evil thugs and I want action… I must say, though, it felt good when I saw chalky-white Iowa stand up strong for Obama and was not the least bit sad that my guy lost.
So who have I left out??? Oh, Hillary. I hate what the republican machine did to her during the Clinton presidency. They have fomented a level of hatred towards her that no one (except the operators of this machine) deserves. It continues today. I think the republicans really want her to win the nomination because they know they can beat her. It is hard to believe that any of the lame republican candidates could beat a democrat, but then again, look who’s in the Whitehouse. Before Obama’s surprising strong finish in Iowa, the media had pretty much appointed her the candidate. I think this is because she is the most knees-deep (neck-deep) in the corporate well and because they know they can beat her. They have created a scenario where, while a savvy and powerful figure, people have been taught to dislike her. Does she have the charisma of Obama, or even Edwards? No. But she is more appealing than given credit for, and she is a very capable person. But, there is a baseline dislike for her and that would allow Skeletor (Giuliani), or (gosh forbid) a square-jawed, fascist Mormon can gain traction and win the presidency. I’ll stop now and get back later (to those few of the Ho Hummers out there that stand more of it) after the New Hampshire result. My prediction? The beginning of the end of Hillary, and hello Barack.
No comments:
Post a Comment