That's what we should be talking about. The media reaches millions of people and they give a kind of permission to everyone, that it's okay to be dissmissive and disrespectful of a serious contender for the race...

[T]o the loathed minority of people like me, who don't particularly love or hate either primary candidate, [. . .] MSNBC [is] as unreliable as it was in the run up to the war. [. . .]  [S]ince their friendly Democratic bias seems to stem from an idiosyncratic, personal basis, they are not behaving with any more journalistic integrity than they ever were, it's just that their corruption is benefiting our side this time.

Does it take a certain Audacity to Hope that Obama will somehow repair all the damage he's done before November? Yes, yes it does. That's not what I imagined he was talking about in his book, though.

The "I can reach across the aisle" candidate is, however, flatly turning down McCain's offer to go along and teach him something about the area and the progress that's been made.

Head Scratching

I know I'm not alone in the League of Mostly Nonaligned Bloggers in being rather puzzled by Clinton supporters. I don't mean all people who supported her, but the ones who are still pushing for her candidacy. As far as I can tell they want her to be the candidate and really just don't care how that happens as long as it does. At this point only a drastic rule change combined with a massive shift in support from superdelegates even gets her close to the nomination. In another words, cheating combined with the smoke-filled room residents overturning the outcome of the primary process.
I never really cared all that much about who won this thing, but at some point Obama became the only one with a legitimate path to the nomination. I just stare and scratch my head and wonder what it's all about. I appreciate that there are people who don't like Obama for whatever reasons and prefer Clinton for whatever reasons. But he, you know, won?

In a quick phone interview with me just now, prominent Hillary supporter James Carville diverged from the Hillary campaign message on several key "electability" questions, saying that he thinks Obama "will" win the general election.

Carville, surprisingly, also seemed to downplay Obama's problems with non-college whites -- a cornerstone of Hillary's electability claim -- saying that if Obama gets the same level of non-college whites that John Kerry did in 2004, he "will" win the general.

Asked if he thought Obama would beat McCain, Carville said: "I think he will. I think Democrats will win in November...There's a crushing desire for change in this country. No one has seen a party or brand held in such low esteem" than the Republicans.

Carville's repeated suggestions that Obama "will" beat McCain contrast with the core Hillary message -- repeated frequently by Hillary advisers -- that Obama merely "can" win a general election, while Hillary "will" win it. Carville's comments also suggest that with the fall contest looming, it's becoming tougher for prominent Hillary backers to sustain any argument that doesn't show full confidence in Obama's chances against McCain.

Carville stressed that he thought Hillary was a better bet against McCain, but reiterated his confidence in Obama. "Hillary would be a stronger candidate, but I think he'll win this thing," Carville said.

Asked about claims that Obama has a problem with non-college whites that could hamper his electability, Carville said that thanks to changes in the electorate, to win Obama merely has to match the performance of Kerry, who underperformed with that group.

"I would argue that if he gets what Kerry got he will still win the election, because the dynamics have changed," Carville said, pointing to likely larger turnout among young voters, African Americans and other demographic changes. Carville joked, however, that he'd be loath to see Obama fall below Kerry's performance.

Now, my argument against his being nominated is due to no experience, being from the southside of chicago, his associations and lack of accomplishments and the polls continually showing him doing poorly.

I do not believe that the pundit on Fox who was saying Hillary was suspending her campaign knew what she was talking about anymore than any other pundit saying the same things today.

When Hillary gave out her post primary schedule to the press corp, Spokesman Jay Carson said, "There are a lot of places for us to go between June 4 and November."

I do not believe he meant to she will be campaigning for Obama and he didn't say August, he said November.

Does anyone think that there is even a sliver of truth to the rumor, that even Lou Dobbs talked about on his radio show yesterday, that Hillary is concidering a run as an indy? she has until the end of June to decide.

james Carville said today that the Obama camp's role in the RFK comment dust-up, as well as the party and media reaction was very hurtfull to her and he called it a 'game-changer'.

He joins:

Jon Ausman, DNC member, uncommitted currently but former Kucinich supporter and the one who brought the appeal

Raul Martinez, Clinton supporter and former Hialeah mayor who is currently running against Republican Lincoln Diaz-Balart for a House seat

Janee Murphy, Obama supporter and DNC member

Senator Bob Graham, uncommitted currently as he doesn't want to declare prior to the RBC meeting and former Governor and former Senator

Senator Bill Nelson, Clinton supporter and current Senator, will be representing the state party

Compare to the speech he gave at Wesleyan:

" I began following the debates in this country about poverty and health care. So that by the time I graduated from college, I was possessed with a crazy idea - that I would work at a grassroots level to bring about change.

I wrote letters to every organization in the country I could think of. And one day, a small group of churches on the South Side of Chicago offered me a job to come work as a community organizer in neighborhoods that had been devastated by steel plant closings. My mother and grandparents wanted me to go to law school. My friends were applying to jobs on Wall Street. Meanwhile, this organization offered me $12,000 a year plus $2,000 for an old, beat-up car.

And I said yes."

   Editor's Note: In light of explosive revelations made Thursday morning by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan claiming that President Bush ordered the leak of classified information in the CIA leak case, The Public Record is republishing an April 2006 story by Jason Leopold who first broke the story about Bush's role in the leak.

    Bush at Center of Intelligence Leak, by Jason Leopold, Thursday April 06 2006

    Attorneys and current and former White House officials close to the investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson said Thursday that President Bush gave Vice President Dick Cheney the authorization in mid-June 2003 to disclose a portion of the highly sensitive National Intelligence Estimate to Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward and former New York Times reporter Judith Miller.

    These current and former White House officials are among the 36 witnesses who have testified before a grand jury and have been cooperating with the special counsel's probe since its inception.

    The officials, some of whom are attorneys close to the case, added that more than two dozen emails that the vice president's office said it recently discovered and handed over to leak investigators in February show that President Bush was kept up to date about the circumstances surrounding the effort to discredit former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Rereading earlier posts, I have to say there's still a lot of tension around race and white guilt (or defensiveness).  It's not that complicated, folks.  White privilege exists.  AND white poverty can be as oppressive as AA poverty.  Trinity church stirs up it's membership because that's what keeps people coming and giving money.  For the same reason, the right wing & Murdock's Fox use inflammatory BS they know will get them ratings and money.  Face it, talking about Jesus and the good we can do in the world just isn't enough to compete for those high ratings they both need.  It would be useful if Obama or his surrogates could put together something that denounces the deliberate sexism and racism that emerges from Trinity and any other church, while still recognizing that the basic message is valid.  For instance, is it possible to point out that terrorists flew two planes into NYC's center of capitalism while only one was flown toward Washington DC?  From this, I'm sure we can recognize that our enemies hate our economic policies as much as our government.  But instead we get "chickens coming home to roost" because we are unable or unwilling to take responsibility to stop the rampant capitalistic machine that is poisoning our country and our world.  Point is, if we dealt with the underlying problem, we wouldn't be stuck responding to someone like Pastor Wright.  Just sayin'.

Anyhow, to follow up on the other heated conversations today, how about some solutions instead of bickering about whether racism really exists or how bad it is or whether or not the experience of poor whites invalidates it.  Sorry McCauley, but reparations paid by taxpayers won't fix the ongoing problem, they would simply reinforce it.  You really do have to go after the beneficiaries of racism/slaver, and making all taxpayers pay does not do that.  Our ancestors who fought on the winning side of the civil war and my ancestors who worked for civil rights already paid the price.  And I won't pay off the bi-racial members of my own family to help ease their suffering caused at the hands of racists, current or past.  However, I will continue to work for racial and gender fairness and equity (and I'd be glad to elaborate on that off-line sometime). Having experienced sexism, racism and anti-gay violence, I can tell you that knee jerk responses to accusations of racism/sexism don't help much.  Reasoned and seasoned opinions do.  

Here's a few examples:  There are lots of people who have an easy ride through college because they're competing with poorer students who have to make a living while going to school.  Many others get a free ride because their family or their family's associates and friends give them great jobs.  Did they work hard to get where they are today?  Maybe.  But plenty of hardworking people got nowhere in their careers because they didn't have the right connections.  Once you accept that you are the recipient of a biased and unfair system, you're more able to try to change it.

There are plenty of wealthy southerners who live on land or off entitlements passed down from slave owners.  You know that.  For the woman from Florida who thinks she's only remotely related to the ancestors who've passed that wealth down to her so she can spend her days riding horses, may I ask whether or not she hires low income Hispanic workers to shovel the horse manure and clean her own toilet? I don't expect you or anyone in your situation to give up your inheritance (though it may be wrested from you someday.)  But I do expect you to work for equality and justice.  (Given I don't know your exact situation, if this doesn't fit you experience, please envision it as a description of someone else who does still benefit from slavery and racism.)