On November 19 President Bush named Dr. Condoleeza Rice as his Secretary of State nominee to replace General Colin Powell. It wasn't much of a surprise since Dr. Rice is a trusted advisor to President Bush. What was a surprise was the reaction in some parts of the political landscape.
Several political cartoons were quite offensive in depicting Dr. Rice in the most negative stereotypical African American visual images. A Wisconsin Disc jockey referred to her as unqualified and as “Aunt Jemima” and a number of respected journalists chided President Bush for choosing “subservient” minority appointees. Maureen Dowd of the New York Times referred to these appointments as “toadies”. One can only wonder in what American presidential administration were there any appointments that weren’t subservient to the presidency? How is it that the media has gone from depicting President Bush as a bumbler needing the support of his cabinet to some one who’s Machiavellian ways now need to be reigned in by a counter weighting staff?
What is most interesting about the appointment of Dr. Rice and the subsequent reaction is the deafening silence from certain organizations that one might think would be overjoyed to see an African American become the most powerful woman in the world.
Go to the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) site and look for any press releases regarding Dr. Rice’s appointment and you can find a four-sentence response denouncing the disc jockey’s comments. There is not another single piece of information regarding the advancement of this colored person. In fact a search of the entire site brings back no reference to Dr. Rice at all. The NOW or National Organization for Women site has not a single reference to the outrageous insults to Dr. Rice nor does it refer to the significance of the second woman in history being named as Secretary of State.
Go to almost any other African American Media outlet internet page and there is not a single story as to the importance of this appointment. Ebony Magazine, Oprah Winfrey’s O magazine and a number of others listed in this Google search http://www.unc.edu/~haman/media.htm have no reference what so ever. One can only come to the conclusion that the achievement of an African American woman of this magnitude is significant in the liberal and African American media only if that woman is a Democrat. I come to that conclusion because in one black publication, Donna Brazile is mentioned prominently for an appointment to the DNC Chairmanship that she reportedly is rejecting yet Dr. Rice gets not a mention.
Only time will tell whether or not Dr. Rice will go down in history as a significant secretary of state. There is however no doubt that she has earned her chance to serve in the position. Time will also tell the impact that Dr. Rice will have on young minority women as a role model in this country and even in the world. If it is possible for Condoleeza Rice to reach such levels of achievement then why not them?
Dr. Rice brings substantial academic and intellectual credentials to her position. I won’t go into details here but a cursory look at her resume reveals a multi talented person in a number of areas. http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html
In addition, she has the experience to fulfill her duties, she has served a full four years as one of President Bush's closest confidants as National Security advisor. She has certainly proved her mettle by competing with a core of Bush advisors that by all accounts are no shrinking violets. Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and others in the Bush cabinet are seasoned bureaucratic and policy infighters who would have any timid operators for lunch. Dr. Rice has held up well in this team and in fact has kept the President's confidence and now stands to show the country just why she deserves it. It amazes me that she has not received the recognition she is due from the minority political establishment.
Update. In further searching on this subject I did find an article in Essence in February 2002 by Isabel Wilkerson coincidently titled "The most powerful woman in the world". It can be found here and is a very good read http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1264/is_10_32/ai_94044128
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Monday, November 22, 2004
Thuggery
Any casual sports fan could not have missed the relentless playing of the videotape of the ugly encounter between the players for the Indiana Pacers and the Detroit Piston’s fans in Auburn Hills Michigan over the weekend.
The whole event began with a hard foul on Detroit’s Ben Wallace by Indiana’s Ron Artest. With little time left on the clock and Indiana leading by 15 points Wallace reacted with umbrage and gave Artest a hard push which resulted in both benches joining the fray. Artest quickly retreated behind his fellow teammates and then began posturing as usual. He lay down on the scorer’s table and began engaging in banter with announcers near the bench. The officials were in the processing of controlling this brief skirmish when a fan threw a plastic cup of cold water that doused Artest as he lay on the table. Artest reacted with rage and rushed into the stands and began to pummel a fan that by all accounts had nothing to do with throwing the cup. Stephen Jackson soon joined Artest and the melee was on.
Many apologists in the sport are now pointing the finger at unruly fans that should bear the responsibility for this ugly incident. This is nonsense. One fan out of over ten thousand who were in attendance threw a cup of water, which is hardly a life-threatening act. Artest who is no stranger to rage acted like a maniac blindly attacking a fan who happened to be in the general area.
It is not hard to imagine the reaction of the crowd at seeing a 6’ 8” 260 pound man pummeling a helpless fan. Even more so after seeing the actions of other huge men smashing faces with huge fists it is a miracle the players weren’t given a severe beating which in some people’s view, Artest richly deserved. One chair was thrown and the players were soaked with beer and popcorn but otherwise they escaped unscathed. They were lucky the crowd acted with more restraint than the players had.
To NBA Commissioner Stern’s credit he has acted swiftly and meted out the most severe suspension punishment in his leagues history. Artest is gone for the rest of the year and the other primary culprits; Steven Jackson and Jermaine O’Neil are gone for 30 and 25 games respectively. This of course is not the end as we are sure to see a number of civil suits and hopefully criminal charges applied to both players and fans alike.
For those of us who have been NBA fans for many years this is simply one more indication of a slow and steady decline of the NBA product. Although the price of the product has risen ever higher and the players are bigger the product is terrible. On almost every statistical level the sport has declined. More so the personality of the players and their actions have diminished as well. Long the envy of other sports because of the college education of the players, we are now subjected to immaturity in persona and undeveloped skills in the younger tier of the league. These attributes have been vividly displayed on the international level. Once dominated by our college players our pros have now been humiliated in international competition.
Commissioner Stern has acted swiftly and decisively to this incident however this is only indicative of a greater underlying problem. If not corrected it won’t be long before the fan base is fed up with an over priced and under performing product that in addition you wouldn’t want to expose your children to.
The whole event began with a hard foul on Detroit’s Ben Wallace by Indiana’s Ron Artest. With little time left on the clock and Indiana leading by 15 points Wallace reacted with umbrage and gave Artest a hard push which resulted in both benches joining the fray. Artest quickly retreated behind his fellow teammates and then began posturing as usual. He lay down on the scorer’s table and began engaging in banter with announcers near the bench. The officials were in the processing of controlling this brief skirmish when a fan threw a plastic cup of cold water that doused Artest as he lay on the table. Artest reacted with rage and rushed into the stands and began to pummel a fan that by all accounts had nothing to do with throwing the cup. Stephen Jackson soon joined Artest and the melee was on.
Many apologists in the sport are now pointing the finger at unruly fans that should bear the responsibility for this ugly incident. This is nonsense. One fan out of over ten thousand who were in attendance threw a cup of water, which is hardly a life-threatening act. Artest who is no stranger to rage acted like a maniac blindly attacking a fan who happened to be in the general area.
It is not hard to imagine the reaction of the crowd at seeing a 6’ 8” 260 pound man pummeling a helpless fan. Even more so after seeing the actions of other huge men smashing faces with huge fists it is a miracle the players weren’t given a severe beating which in some people’s view, Artest richly deserved. One chair was thrown and the players were soaked with beer and popcorn but otherwise they escaped unscathed. They were lucky the crowd acted with more restraint than the players had.
To NBA Commissioner Stern’s credit he has acted swiftly and meted out the most severe suspension punishment in his leagues history. Artest is gone for the rest of the year and the other primary culprits; Steven Jackson and Jermaine O’Neil are gone for 30 and 25 games respectively. This of course is not the end as we are sure to see a number of civil suits and hopefully criminal charges applied to both players and fans alike.
For those of us who have been NBA fans for many years this is simply one more indication of a slow and steady decline of the NBA product. Although the price of the product has risen ever higher and the players are bigger the product is terrible. On almost every statistical level the sport has declined. More so the personality of the players and their actions have diminished as well. Long the envy of other sports because of the college education of the players, we are now subjected to immaturity in persona and undeveloped skills in the younger tier of the league. These attributes have been vividly displayed on the international level. Once dominated by our college players our pros have now been humiliated in international competition.
Commissioner Stern has acted swiftly and decisively to this incident however this is only indicative of a greater underlying problem. If not corrected it won’t be long before the fan base is fed up with an over priced and under performing product that in addition you wouldn’t want to expose your children to.
Friday, November 19, 2004
The Bonus Round
Getting on way past fifty
The joints are moving kind of stiffly
My dancing moves are even less nifty
This boy is getting somewhat hefty
I guess I'm in the bonus round
The nest is finally empty
And the children safely grown
No more worries of any mischief sown
Now how wonderful to even hear them on the phone
The college payments made
The wedding bills paid
How pretty the brides smile
And how proud a daddy walking down the aisle
The belly makes odd growls
And the lines in the face seem a permanent scowl
The hearing of silent ringing sounds
Maybe misplaced things are found
I'm in the bonus round
After many tries I gave up butts
And hardly care about missed 3 foot putts
Work is more a haven than a rut
Got a kid next door for the grass to cut
Born in the United States
By the luck of the draw to such a fate
Making sure to have a clean slate
So why worry about getting older
Perhaps time to think of getting bolder
There is only so much time allotted
So sally forth undaunted
In no time things can turn around
In a blink you could be in the ground
I'm loving the bonus round
The joints are moving kind of stiffly
My dancing moves are even less nifty
This boy is getting somewhat hefty
I guess I'm in the bonus round
The nest is finally empty
And the children safely grown
No more worries of any mischief sown
Now how wonderful to even hear them on the phone
The college payments made
The wedding bills paid
How pretty the brides smile
And how proud a daddy walking down the aisle
The belly makes odd growls
And the lines in the face seem a permanent scowl
The hearing of silent ringing sounds
Maybe misplaced things are found
I'm in the bonus round
After many tries I gave up butts
And hardly care about missed 3 foot putts
Work is more a haven than a rut
Got a kid next door for the grass to cut
Born in the United States
By the luck of the draw to such a fate
Making sure to have a clean slate
So why worry about getting older
Perhaps time to think of getting bolder
There is only so much time allotted
So sally forth undaunted
In no time things can turn around
In a blink you could be in the ground
I'm loving the bonus round
Monday, November 15, 2004
An historic opportunity?
Today's news regarding the reported pending resignation of Secretary of State Colin Powell is not particularly good news for American foreign policy. Given the current imminent changes in the players and potential for positive developments in the Middle East it is also somewhat surprising and disappointing that Secretary Powell would leave his post at this point.
With the death of Arafat and the impending elections by the Palestinians it would appear that a window of opportunity is opening in the peace process. President Bush who to this point has been disengaged from the process has indicated a willingness to spend "political capital" in trying to finally bring about a peace deal. During the campaign he had made it clear that he supported a two state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and with a new term ahead of him and a dramatically changing landscape in the Middle east it would seem as though now could be the time for making some lasting progress.
Nothing in the area is predictable however and the main concern at this point is the Palestinian succession to Arafat. Are the moderates in ascendancy in the PLO leadership or are we going to see a more militant faction take legitimate political control? Hamas is the primary concern and main political threat. Although most commonly known as the primary provider of suicide bombers, Hamas is also an organized political operation that has been building strength with the electorate as a result of its having provided a variety of social services in the region. If Hamas does gain legitimate political power are they likely to continue a campaign of violence or engage in constructive dialogue with Israel and the Quartet?
The Quartet is the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia who together are responsible for the drafting of the three phase "Roadmap" to peace. Like any long journey the first step is the most important and so it is with the "Roadmap". The primary condition of phase one is for "the Palestinians to undertake an unconditional cessation of violence."
Both sides have difficult hurdles to meet to initially get the process underway. Although appearing simple in writing, instituting such requirements will be difficult. The following initial requirements are taken from the State Department release of April 30 2003.
"Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statements reiterating Israel's right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere. All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel".
"Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two state-vision of an independent, viable sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security alongside Israel, as expressed by President Bush, and calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians everywhere. All official Israeli institutions end incitement against Palestinians”.
Given the historic animus between the two peoples is someone willing to be the first to say and do such things on both sides?
This may be another false alarm or perhaps it is the very beginning of an historic achievement. It is perhaps made a more difficult task now that Secretary Powell will not be leading the United States effort to bring peace to this tortured area of the world.
There has been some speculation as to his successor and hopefully for all the parties involved that person will have the international stature enjoyed by Secretary Powell.
With the death of Arafat and the impending elections by the Palestinians it would appear that a window of opportunity is opening in the peace process. President Bush who to this point has been disengaged from the process has indicated a willingness to spend "political capital" in trying to finally bring about a peace deal. During the campaign he had made it clear that he supported a two state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and with a new term ahead of him and a dramatically changing landscape in the Middle east it would seem as though now could be the time for making some lasting progress.
Nothing in the area is predictable however and the main concern at this point is the Palestinian succession to Arafat. Are the moderates in ascendancy in the PLO leadership or are we going to see a more militant faction take legitimate political control? Hamas is the primary concern and main political threat. Although most commonly known as the primary provider of suicide bombers, Hamas is also an organized political operation that has been building strength with the electorate as a result of its having provided a variety of social services in the region. If Hamas does gain legitimate political power are they likely to continue a campaign of violence or engage in constructive dialogue with Israel and the Quartet?
The Quartet is the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia who together are responsible for the drafting of the three phase "Roadmap" to peace. Like any long journey the first step is the most important and so it is with the "Roadmap". The primary condition of phase one is for "the Palestinians to undertake an unconditional cessation of violence."
Both sides have difficult hurdles to meet to initially get the process underway. Although appearing simple in writing, instituting such requirements will be difficult. The following initial requirements are taken from the State Department release of April 30 2003.
"Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statements reiterating Israel's right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere. All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel".
"Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two state-vision of an independent, viable sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security alongside Israel, as expressed by President Bush, and calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians everywhere. All official Israeli institutions end incitement against Palestinians”.
Given the historic animus between the two peoples is someone willing to be the first to say and do such things on both sides?
This may be another false alarm or perhaps it is the very beginning of an historic achievement. It is perhaps made a more difficult task now that Secretary Powell will not be leading the United States effort to bring peace to this tortured area of the world.
There has been some speculation as to his successor and hopefully for all the parties involved that person will have the international stature enjoyed by Secretary Powell.
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Relax
If you are reading the opinion pages from both the red and the blue you can’t help but notice the combination of exultation and depression engulfing the 5% of the ideologues on both the right and the left. They all seem to forget the huge amount of us in the middle that neither consider this an overwhelming mandate for the Republicans nor the death knell of the Democrats.
All the hand wringing on the left seems some what ridiculous when you look back at the campaigns major issues and indeed the candidates themselves. Bush and Kerry both graduated from the same schools, both are members of the secret society Skull and Bones and both were frat boys I am sure. Both are rich white men. Certainly at this point both would have to be considered Washington insiders. According to Ralph Nader the candidates and the parties are almost twins.
Similarly on the right we have talk about the pre-eminence of the Bush campaign team and the positive impact it will have on major conservative initiatives. Let’s not get carried away. Yes they have a 55 vote majority in the senate but part of that majority includes some liberalish kind of eastern Republicans who aren’t quite on board the God express.
On the major issues of the day there seemed to be very little difference between the parties. Bush and Kerry policy on Iraq for the most part was the same. The need to see it through, establish democracy, do reparations and get the Hell out. On Iran both Bush and Kerry are happy to give the Europeans plenty of latitude to see whether or not talk can diffuse a rapidly escalating situation. On North Korea there was some disagreement as to whether to continue the six party talks or institute a bilateral approach but both recognize North Korea as a potential hot spot.
Other issues in which there appeared to be a difference might only be one of perception. Bush favors a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage yet endorsed civil union. So in the end if marriage or civil union correct any rights inequities isn’t it the same thing but by a different name?
Stem cell research was mostly a smoke and mirrors issue. Stem cells is a nascent issue. Although holding out some great promise there is nothing distinctly on the horizon to indicate that this promise will come to fruition. There wasn’t much difference between the two candidates. Bush was the first president to approve federal funding of stem cell research and is sure to go forward albeit a bit more slowly than Kerry might have.
On the whole menu of remaining issues including United States Supreme Court nominations there is likely to be the same type of result that we normally get. A lot of weeping and moaning and gnashing of teeth with enough horse trading that result in a consensus being built.
So let’s stop the incessant whining about how stupid middle America is and let’s cancel our reservations for the flight to Canada and lets stop crowing about how out of touch Hollywood and the eastern liberal elite is and let’s relax and get down to business American style.
All the hand wringing on the left seems some what ridiculous when you look back at the campaigns major issues and indeed the candidates themselves. Bush and Kerry both graduated from the same schools, both are members of the secret society Skull and Bones and both were frat boys I am sure. Both are rich white men. Certainly at this point both would have to be considered Washington insiders. According to Ralph Nader the candidates and the parties are almost twins.
Similarly on the right we have talk about the pre-eminence of the Bush campaign team and the positive impact it will have on major conservative initiatives. Let’s not get carried away. Yes they have a 55 vote majority in the senate but part of that majority includes some liberalish kind of eastern Republicans who aren’t quite on board the God express.
On the major issues of the day there seemed to be very little difference between the parties. Bush and Kerry policy on Iraq for the most part was the same. The need to see it through, establish democracy, do reparations and get the Hell out. On Iran both Bush and Kerry are happy to give the Europeans plenty of latitude to see whether or not talk can diffuse a rapidly escalating situation. On North Korea there was some disagreement as to whether to continue the six party talks or institute a bilateral approach but both recognize North Korea as a potential hot spot.
Other issues in which there appeared to be a difference might only be one of perception. Bush favors a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage yet endorsed civil union. So in the end if marriage or civil union correct any rights inequities isn’t it the same thing but by a different name?
Stem cell research was mostly a smoke and mirrors issue. Stem cells is a nascent issue. Although holding out some great promise there is nothing distinctly on the horizon to indicate that this promise will come to fruition. There wasn’t much difference between the two candidates. Bush was the first president to approve federal funding of stem cell research and is sure to go forward albeit a bit more slowly than Kerry might have.
On the whole menu of remaining issues including United States Supreme Court nominations there is likely to be the same type of result that we normally get. A lot of weeping and moaning and gnashing of teeth with enough horse trading that result in a consensus being built.
So let’s stop the incessant whining about how stupid middle America is and let’s cancel our reservations for the flight to Canada and lets stop crowing about how out of touch Hollywood and the eastern liberal elite is and let’s relax and get down to business American style.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Proud to live in Massachusetts
The race is over and the result is one I agree with. It is an all or nothing result for the candidate but how the election impacts the myriad of issues facing the nation remains to be seen. One of those issues is gay marriage. For the moment the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision has been met nationally with anger, resentment and voter backlash. It cannot be said with certainty that it was the turning point in the election. It is apparent that it had to be one of the items which has been referred to as the "moral values" component of the Bush victory.
As a citizen of the state I have many misgivings about the the way in which this decision was arrived at and then the subsequent lack of spine exhibited by the state legislature in addressing it in a way that they had to stand up and be counted. They neither acted forthrightly before or after the decision. A 4 to 3 vote of the Supreme Court gave them cover and they are pleased to hide under it.
The question placed before the court was "whether, consistent with the Massachusetts Constitution, the commonwealth may deny the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry," according to the majority opinion. "We conclude that it may not." The court went on to say "Barred access to the protections, benefits and obligations of civil marriage, a person who enters into an intimate, exclusive union with another of the same sex is arbitrarily deprived of membership in one of our community's most rewarding and cherished institutions,"
The central issue for me is not one of religion or procreation. It is about the simplest of things in the human condition. Love, friendship, companionship and all the wonderful things in marriage that enrich a persons life, as a result of the court decision, are now affirmed in the gay community under law. In addition there are many aspects of estate, insurance, privacy, and access law which are now non discriminatory. Look around for a minute. In the family, in the circle of friends and in the workplace, if you can't see that gay people occupy places in our lives then we are not looking very hard. It is simply not right that they should be denied the rights accorded everyone else.
I have no background to argue the finer points of the law as a protagonist or antagonist on the issue. However, I do recognize inequality when I see it and it was time for this issue to be addressed in Massachusetts and the hard task of arriving at an acceptable result in the nation as a whole has begun. It has begun because Massachusetts has placed the issue front and center in the national consciousness.
Resistance will continue and acceptance in some quarters may never be realized however we still have some in the nation that believe women and blacks shouldn't have the vote. In the end the country will be better for having confronted the issue.
As a state we have had a full year. The achievement of our sports team, and having a favorite son in the race for president has riveted our attention. We have had our citizens on display all over the nation working diligently to affect the course of our people. This is the third time in my lifetime that we have sent forth a citizen to try and become the leader of the greatest nation on earth. Each time a large cadre of our citizens has mobilized to challenge our country. We love the Red Sox but politics is really our favorite sport. John Kerry may have lost the race but he ran a good hard race and when the end came he accepted defeat in a way that brought dignity and graciousness back to an election process which was so desperately in need of both after the 2000 result.
Massachusetts is a very small place but it is big in heart and determination. We are a community of thinkers and doers. Come here and go to college or receive world class medical treatment or work on the cutting edges of science. I am never surprised that we are pushing the envelope in any area. I am proud to live here.
As a citizen of the state I have many misgivings about the the way in which this decision was arrived at and then the subsequent lack of spine exhibited by the state legislature in addressing it in a way that they had to stand up and be counted. They neither acted forthrightly before or after the decision. A 4 to 3 vote of the Supreme Court gave them cover and they are pleased to hide under it.
The question placed before the court was "whether, consistent with the Massachusetts Constitution, the commonwealth may deny the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry," according to the majority opinion. "We conclude that it may not." The court went on to say "Barred access to the protections, benefits and obligations of civil marriage, a person who enters into an intimate, exclusive union with another of the same sex is arbitrarily deprived of membership in one of our community's most rewarding and cherished institutions,"
The central issue for me is not one of religion or procreation. It is about the simplest of things in the human condition. Love, friendship, companionship and all the wonderful things in marriage that enrich a persons life, as a result of the court decision, are now affirmed in the gay community under law. In addition there are many aspects of estate, insurance, privacy, and access law which are now non discriminatory. Look around for a minute. In the family, in the circle of friends and in the workplace, if you can't see that gay people occupy places in our lives then we are not looking very hard. It is simply not right that they should be denied the rights accorded everyone else.
I have no background to argue the finer points of the law as a protagonist or antagonist on the issue. However, I do recognize inequality when I see it and it was time for this issue to be addressed in Massachusetts and the hard task of arriving at an acceptable result in the nation as a whole has begun. It has begun because Massachusetts has placed the issue front and center in the national consciousness.
Resistance will continue and acceptance in some quarters may never be realized however we still have some in the nation that believe women and blacks shouldn't have the vote. In the end the country will be better for having confronted the issue.
As a state we have had a full year. The achievement of our sports team, and having a favorite son in the race for president has riveted our attention. We have had our citizens on display all over the nation working diligently to affect the course of our people. This is the third time in my lifetime that we have sent forth a citizen to try and become the leader of the greatest nation on earth. Each time a large cadre of our citizens has mobilized to challenge our country. We love the Red Sox but politics is really our favorite sport. John Kerry may have lost the race but he ran a good hard race and when the end came he accepted defeat in a way that brought dignity and graciousness back to an election process which was so desperately in need of both after the 2000 result.
Massachusetts is a very small place but it is big in heart and determination. We are a community of thinkers and doers. Come here and go to college or receive world class medical treatment or work on the cutting edges of science. I am never surprised that we are pushing the envelope in any area. I am proud to live here.
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
I stayed up until 2:30 A.M. watching Dan Rather breathlessly explain why CBS was holding off on a call in Ohio. "I would rather be last than wrong". That is quite a contrast to the judgement he displayed in airing the fraudulent Bush Texas National Guard documents. He went on to explain how provisional ballots in Ohio could still be a key to a Kerry victory. This seemed somewhat strange since is seemed statistically impossible. Was it more wishful thinking?
There is much analysis to be done in the coming weeks but one thing is for sure is that right up until the last minute the American media was rooting for Kerry and putting their preference into action. The last weeks non story about the fake missing weapons in Iraq as well as the inexplicable exit polls showing Kerry ahead in almost all the battleground states was "scandalous" according to Dick Morris.
The weapons story turned out to be particularly damaging for Kerry because despite it being debunked shortly after the New York Times broke the story, Kerry continued in the last week of the campaign to try and hammer home a victory with the fairy tale of incompetence on the part of Bush and the military. One can only speculate what might have happened if he stayed completely focused on jobs in Ohio.
There are many winners and losers beyond the candidates in a contest of this magnitude. From a political strategy standpoint, Karl Rove, head of the Bush team turns out to be the pre-eminent guru in contemporary American politics. Rove got it right across the board. The millions of evangelical Christians on the sidelines came out to vote in big numbers. This completely trumped the Democratic party emphasis on getting out the youth vote. It simply did not materialize. His focus on galvanizing the core Bush voter as opposed to broadening his appeal bore out his opinion that this core would be so substantial as to be impregnable for Kerry.
The blogosphere was a huge winner while mainstream media was embarrassed. Web sites like Realclearpolitics.com, powerlineblog and Lucianne.com to name a few, were reliable providers of election related information. The New York Times and CBS were humiliated.
In retrospect two issues in particular may have hurt Kerry decisively. The Swiftboat vets were relentless in their attacks and those attacks were made possible by a very large number of internet based contributions. Much as Howard Dean used the net to benefit his candidacy so to did the vets. They started with some of their own seed money and a Bush supporter contribution which together totaled $300,000. By the time they were finished they had raised about 15 million dollars and their ads were common place in some battleground states. Although much smaller in dollars this group was far more effective as a 527 group than the much larger Democratic 527's. The bottom line was that a group of 260 American Viet Nam veterans were far more believable than the George Soros funded 527 groups.
It seems somewhat ironic that the one item which might have swung the entire election was something that emanated in Massachusetts and was supported by some of Kerry's most ardent personal and media supporters. The Boston Globe and New York Times have been activists in encouraging and subsequently cheering the Massachusetts Supreme Court's razor thin 4 to 3 vote to authorize gay marriage in Massachusetts. The state was well on its way to eliminating the civil rights inequities which are inherent in civil law in the state. It was not necessary to have a heavy handed decision come down from the court which had virtually no method of popular appeal. Although the decision did not have a widespread backlash in Massachusetts it reverberated throughout the country with the resulting ballot questions amending state constitutions in 11 battleground states. All of these ballot questions won overwhelmingly. As a branded liberal senator from Massachusetts and his typical tortuous explanation of his position on gay marriage, Kerry could not get out from under this issue.
In the end it was an election the Democrats should have won. They had any number of major foreign and domestic issues to exploit. They had the big media acting as partisan cheerleaders and for the first time they had financial resources which equaled and sometimes exceeded those of the Republicans. Yet in the end not only were they defeated for the presidency but also gave up seats in the house and senate which included that of the minority leader Tom Daschle.
Its time for the Democratic party to do some serious internal finger pointing and then some serious soul searching. The party primaries seemed to be skewed in favor of candidates that must have a resume which appeals to the far left of the party. The elite left core of the party acted like a bunch of smug name callers who were going to free the country of the bumbling dummy from Texas. On the core issues of trust and moral values the Democratic party was found wanting by the heartland of the country.
There is much analysis to be done in the coming weeks but one thing is for sure is that right up until the last minute the American media was rooting for Kerry and putting their preference into action. The last weeks non story about the fake missing weapons in Iraq as well as the inexplicable exit polls showing Kerry ahead in almost all the battleground states was "scandalous" according to Dick Morris.
The weapons story turned out to be particularly damaging for Kerry because despite it being debunked shortly after the New York Times broke the story, Kerry continued in the last week of the campaign to try and hammer home a victory with the fairy tale of incompetence on the part of Bush and the military. One can only speculate what might have happened if he stayed completely focused on jobs in Ohio.
There are many winners and losers beyond the candidates in a contest of this magnitude. From a political strategy standpoint, Karl Rove, head of the Bush team turns out to be the pre-eminent guru in contemporary American politics. Rove got it right across the board. The millions of evangelical Christians on the sidelines came out to vote in big numbers. This completely trumped the Democratic party emphasis on getting out the youth vote. It simply did not materialize. His focus on galvanizing the core Bush voter as opposed to broadening his appeal bore out his opinion that this core would be so substantial as to be impregnable for Kerry.
The blogosphere was a huge winner while mainstream media was embarrassed. Web sites like Realclearpolitics.com, powerlineblog and Lucianne.com to name a few, were reliable providers of election related information. The New York Times and CBS were humiliated.
In retrospect two issues in particular may have hurt Kerry decisively. The Swiftboat vets were relentless in their attacks and those attacks were made possible by a very large number of internet based contributions. Much as Howard Dean used the net to benefit his candidacy so to did the vets. They started with some of their own seed money and a Bush supporter contribution which together totaled $300,000. By the time they were finished they had raised about 15 million dollars and their ads were common place in some battleground states. Although much smaller in dollars this group was far more effective as a 527 group than the much larger Democratic 527's. The bottom line was that a group of 260 American Viet Nam veterans were far more believable than the George Soros funded 527 groups.
It seems somewhat ironic that the one item which might have swung the entire election was something that emanated in Massachusetts and was supported by some of Kerry's most ardent personal and media supporters. The Boston Globe and New York Times have been activists in encouraging and subsequently cheering the Massachusetts Supreme Court's razor thin 4 to 3 vote to authorize gay marriage in Massachusetts. The state was well on its way to eliminating the civil rights inequities which are inherent in civil law in the state. It was not necessary to have a heavy handed decision come down from the court which had virtually no method of popular appeal. Although the decision did not have a widespread backlash in Massachusetts it reverberated throughout the country with the resulting ballot questions amending state constitutions in 11 battleground states. All of these ballot questions won overwhelmingly. As a branded liberal senator from Massachusetts and his typical tortuous explanation of his position on gay marriage, Kerry could not get out from under this issue.
In the end it was an election the Democrats should have won. They had any number of major foreign and domestic issues to exploit. They had the big media acting as partisan cheerleaders and for the first time they had financial resources which equaled and sometimes exceeded those of the Republicans. Yet in the end not only were they defeated for the presidency but also gave up seats in the house and senate which included that of the minority leader Tom Daschle.
Its time for the Democratic party to do some serious internal finger pointing and then some serious soul searching. The party primaries seemed to be skewed in favor of candidates that must have a resume which appeals to the far left of the party. The elite left core of the party acted like a bunch of smug name callers who were going to free the country of the bumbling dummy from Texas. On the core issues of trust and moral values the Democratic party was found wanting by the heartland of the country.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Anticipation
It's 3:15 P.M. on election day here in Burlington Mass. and I am just back from casting my vote. At this time the polling count was around 7000 or just at 50% of the local electorate having cast ballots. It always amazes me to see this kind of turn out in the presidential when we can barely scrape together 20% for the local elections.
In any event our local results seem to be part of the nationwide trend of an unusually high turnout. The talk at the polls is very upbeat for Kerry and many of the locals are expecting a decisive Kerry victory. The thinking here is that Kerry benefits by a huge turnout however I am not convinced that is the case.
I am not sure of any analysis which has been printed which makes any sense but a couple of things do resonate with me. Mark Mellman, a nationally known Democratic pollster makes a couple of very interesting points in a piece in The Hill, http://www.thehill.com/mellman/110204.aspx about how difficult it is to try to unseat an incumbent president during war time. It seems a bit strange to be printing this the day before the election but he seems to be making a case as to why Bush will be winning today. He refers to the misery index which is inflation plus unemployment which together is 7.2 nationally, contrast this to 20.4 when Jimmy Carter was defeated in his re-election bid.
Other comparisons include Bush approval rating which is 49% yet when his father was defeated it was 33% and the overall average for defeated presidents is 38%. Additionally on the right course for the country statistic Bush Sr. Was 72% of the country saying the wrong course while Bush Jr. Is only at 52%. After adding these and other statistics up he comes to the conclusion that President Bush will get 51.6% of the vote. After all is said and done it makes little sense to me that a guy who is being paid to work for Kerry is predicting a Bush victory.
There is no doubt that the Democrats have made a significant get out the vote effort and it seems to be paying dividends but it would be foolish to overlook the grass roots efforts made by the Republicans as well. Of the 18 battleground states 11 have some sort of referendum on the ballot regarding gay marriage. This is a hot button issue and two voting blocks are going to respond to this in very high numbers. Evangelical Christians who were reported to have been luke warm in the last election with as many as four million staying home are certain to come out in force on this issue. An additional turn out wild card is the African American vote. Bush has made inroads in this voting group and with the addition of the gay marriage issue having impact in black church congregations, he may realize larger gains..
One opinion I thought was interesting was George Will's point several weeks ago about the number of Roosveltian era Democrats who have passed away since the 2000 elections. Will had this number pegged at somewhere around 7 million nationally. If even remotely correct that would be a lot of new turnout necessary to make up that loss.
All we can do is wait and see at this point and hope that there is a decisive victory for one or the other. The last thing we need is to have the lawyers arguing in several states over the outcome and leaving us with a disaster like 2000. I doubt very much that the planets are lined up in such a way as to give us the "perfect storm" of elections twice in a row.
In the end I believe President Bush will win because of a variety of reasons. First and foremost is the need to have an ideologue in the white house instead of a diplomat. For too long the US has been a punching bag for Islamo fascists and Bush has put that policy to bed. The UN is a fine ideal and we should be making every effort to continue to be a main pillar of it. However when push comes to shove we can't be having third world diplomats engaging in discussion and voting on issues which are paramount to US security. When it comes to a global test I am a unilateralist.
Even if the candidates were exactly the same on issues for me it would be no contest on the character issue. As a constituent in Kerry's state I have found him to be an unprincipled opportunist who makes decisions based on how it affects his electability. This is apparent when we examine Kerry's reaction to the recent Bin Laden tape. Kerry immediately engaged in polling to measure American reaction in order to test the direction of the wind.
The last straw for me is the Viet Nam issue. In the end Kerry came back and acted like a quisling, denouncing his comrades and fraternizing with the enemy. It is my sincere hope this man is not the president of the United States of America
In any event our local results seem to be part of the nationwide trend of an unusually high turnout. The talk at the polls is very upbeat for Kerry and many of the locals are expecting a decisive Kerry victory. The thinking here is that Kerry benefits by a huge turnout however I am not convinced that is the case.
I am not sure of any analysis which has been printed which makes any sense but a couple of things do resonate with me. Mark Mellman, a nationally known Democratic pollster makes a couple of very interesting points in a piece in The Hill, http://www.thehill.com/mellman/110204.aspx about how difficult it is to try to unseat an incumbent president during war time. It seems a bit strange to be printing this the day before the election but he seems to be making a case as to why Bush will be winning today. He refers to the misery index which is inflation plus unemployment which together is 7.2 nationally, contrast this to 20.4 when Jimmy Carter was defeated in his re-election bid.
Other comparisons include Bush approval rating which is 49% yet when his father was defeated it was 33% and the overall average for defeated presidents is 38%. Additionally on the right course for the country statistic Bush Sr. Was 72% of the country saying the wrong course while Bush Jr. Is only at 52%. After adding these and other statistics up he comes to the conclusion that President Bush will get 51.6% of the vote. After all is said and done it makes little sense to me that a guy who is being paid to work for Kerry is predicting a Bush victory.
There is no doubt that the Democrats have made a significant get out the vote effort and it seems to be paying dividends but it would be foolish to overlook the grass roots efforts made by the Republicans as well. Of the 18 battleground states 11 have some sort of referendum on the ballot regarding gay marriage. This is a hot button issue and two voting blocks are going to respond to this in very high numbers. Evangelical Christians who were reported to have been luke warm in the last election with as many as four million staying home are certain to come out in force on this issue. An additional turn out wild card is the African American vote. Bush has made inroads in this voting group and with the addition of the gay marriage issue having impact in black church congregations, he may realize larger gains..
One opinion I thought was interesting was George Will's point several weeks ago about the number of Roosveltian era Democrats who have passed away since the 2000 elections. Will had this number pegged at somewhere around 7 million nationally. If even remotely correct that would be a lot of new turnout necessary to make up that loss.
All we can do is wait and see at this point and hope that there is a decisive victory for one or the other. The last thing we need is to have the lawyers arguing in several states over the outcome and leaving us with a disaster like 2000. I doubt very much that the planets are lined up in such a way as to give us the "perfect storm" of elections twice in a row.
In the end I believe President Bush will win because of a variety of reasons. First and foremost is the need to have an ideologue in the white house instead of a diplomat. For too long the US has been a punching bag for Islamo fascists and Bush has put that policy to bed. The UN is a fine ideal and we should be making every effort to continue to be a main pillar of it. However when push comes to shove we can't be having third world diplomats engaging in discussion and voting on issues which are paramount to US security. When it comes to a global test I am a unilateralist.
Even if the candidates were exactly the same on issues for me it would be no contest on the character issue. As a constituent in Kerry's state I have found him to be an unprincipled opportunist who makes decisions based on how it affects his electability. This is apparent when we examine Kerry's reaction to the recent Bin Laden tape. Kerry immediately engaged in polling to measure American reaction in order to test the direction of the wind.
The last straw for me is the Viet Nam issue. In the end Kerry came back and acted like a quisling, denouncing his comrades and fraternizing with the enemy. It is my sincere hope this man is not the president of the United States of America
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)