7 posts tagged “politics”

Obama's coffers have been filling since Sarah Palin attacked him repeatedly in St. Paul last night.

An Obama aide confirms Drudge's report that Obama has raised about $8 million from more than 130,000 donors and is on pace to raise $10 million by the time McCain reaches the stage tonight.

UPDATE: Obama spokesman Bill Burton says, "Sarah Palin's attacks have rallied our supporters in ways we never expected. And we fully expect John McCain's attacks tonight to help us make our grassroots organization even stronger."

via

You know, I rarely actually write anything about politics, never here, and rarely on the community blogs I frequent. It's primarily because I'm not the best writer in the world, and usually because someone has said what I want to say better than I could anyway. But all morning I've been dying to write something about Giuliani's speech last night. I haven't been able to formulate a good way to write it without sounding like it's straight out of the metafilter echo chamber. so I'm not going to write one here. But this comment from Douglas Rushkoff's blog, quoted in the thread, sums up what I want to say.

I felt a bit nauseous watching the Republican convention last night. I’m very much a give-the-benefit-of-the-doubt kind of guy, so I try to listen to the arguments people make even when they’re made in over-the-top or patronizing ways. Sometimes it’s good to distinguish between the rhetorical devices and the underlying substance. Even people who use manipulative language sometimes have an important point beneath their persuasion techniques (ads against smoking, for example).

I usually don’t feel uneasy when I put those filters on, but last night - during the Guiliani speech - I realized I was no longer filtering a speechwriter’s intentional manipulation; I was trying to look beyond real hate. These folks were gritting their teeth, shaking their fists, and smiling the way gladiators do when going into combat against barbarians. And this is the incumbent party. The ones currently in power.

What is it they hate? Guiliani and Palin both made it pretty clear: community organizing. Community organizing is energized from below. From the periphery. It is the direction and facilitation of mass energy towards productive and cooperative ends. It is about replacing conflict with collaboration. It is the opposite of war; it is peace.

A month ago, the USA women's team won the Venice Cup, the women's competition at the World Bridge Championships. When they were presented with their trophy, they put up a spontaneous sign stating "we did not vote for Bush". Now, they have been censured and among other penalties, are facing a years suspension, which will affect their incomes. So how far do their rights to express themselves freely, without fear of penalty, go? At my bridge club lately, surprise surprise, it's been quite the topic of conversation. 

(from the BBC) Check it: Iran and the US are two of only eight countries that have not joined the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.

Nice.

So I'm trying hard not to get into political reading yet, as I'm sure I'll be wasting a lot of time next year with the upcoming election. That said, it's sometimes kind of difficult to avoid it. Especially with Rudy Giuliani a frontrunner.

Anyways, there is one thing that I keep reading that has me baffled. I'm not trying to be snarky here (I'd fail) but I am genuinely confused, so if someone could explain this to me I'd be grateful.

It seems like the accepted wisdom is that Giuliani is a strong candidate, albeit causing reservations in the Republican base because of his stance on gay rights and abortion (he seemed a little vacillating about that one recently, but apparently he's about to publicly embrace abortion rights, like, today or something according to google) and his personal life.

But this is the bit that confuses me. Often when I read about him, I read a statement that says something like "but he has impeccable tough on crime, tough on terrorism credentials".

Tough on crime I can see. Tough on terrorism? Didn't 9/11 happen on his watch? I mean, yeah, good on him, he hightailed it down to Ground Zero when others were taking off to their secure locations, and he was visible and did a good job with the aftermath. But how does that equate to being tough on terrorism? Preaching fighting words after the fact isn't "tough on terrorism". Cleaning up nicely isn't "tough on terrorism".

I'm confused. 'Splainy?

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif) has acknowledged his nontheism. Pretty amazing that he's the first member of Congress in history to do so. Well, not really when you consider that atheists are the least trusted minority in the USA.

Well done, Mr. Stark.

Letter from an inmate. Via mefi.