Experience AND Inspiration

Roseanne Barr has in interesting piece on the huffington post today entitled Experience Vs Inspiration. Its quite obvious Roseanne is a supporter of Hillary Clinton and I have no problem with that.

Let me say first, that I respect Roseanne and admire her work as an entertainer. I'm probably one of the biggest Roseanne fans out and I'm still waiting to get the rest of her seasons on DVD. However there is a huge fallacy in her argument that Senator Clinton is more experienced than Obama.

Senator Obama has been an elected official for over 10 years compared to Clinton's 8. Before that, he was a community organizer on the Southside of Chicago fighting for working families. Senator Clinton sat on the board of walmart.

Senator Obama does have the ability to inspire others. He is bringing thousands of new voters into the fold (which may make the difference in downballot elections). So how can we turn that away?

The question isn't, who is the most experienced, the question is which experience is best for working families and which experience will help beat John Mccain.

I think it's time for Tavis Smiley to go kick rocks...

Senator Obama has taken heat recently by Commentator Tavis Smiley for not attending his yearly day long promo for his books The State of the Black Union.

Although I enjoy watching the State of The Black Union on C-SPAN, I find it quite pointless. It's a group of liberal academics who sit around and talk about issues concerning the African American community. Sen. Obama is in for the fight of his life in Texas and Ohio and needs to spend all of his time there campaigning. If Mr. Smiley REALLY cares about issues concenring the black community, he would care about our candidates working towards winning the presidency and extending our majority in Congress instead of pimping candidates to line his own pockets.

Below is an excerpt from a Washington Post blog that has quotes from both parties:

"Obama followed up with a letter to Smiley, dated Feb. 13. In it, Obama explained why he declined the invitation, saying that he needed to campaign in states that Clinton must win to in order to topple her candidacy. "I will be on the campaign trail every day in states like Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin talking directly to voters about the causes that are at the heart of my campaign and the State of the Black Union forum such as affordable housing, economic opportunity, civil rights and foreign policy," Obama said in his letter. He had offered to have his wife, Michelle, speak in his stead at the State of the Black Union, but Smiley had declined. "I ask that you reconsider," Obama wrote. "Michelle is a powerful voice for the type of reach change America is hungry for."
Smiley responded in a commentary on the Tom Joyner Morning Show, condemning Obama's decision with his usual strong, passionate, rapid-fire delivery. He recounted the gist of his statement in the interview. "I think it is a miscalculation on his part not to appear and a missed opportunity.""I love Barack Obama and I love black people," Smiley said. "I celebrate his past accomplishments and I celebrate his future aspirations. I never wanted to stand in the path of his growth."However, he said, "My job is to ask the critical question, to raise these issues and keep these guys focused. There are some people who are disappointed that I'm not jumping up and down saying, 'Vote for Barack Obama.' That's not my role as a journalist. That's not what I do."


Smiley has acknowledged that he has received criticism as well as death threats. While I don't agree with death threats, I think he should receive criticism. Someone needs to tell him to go kick rocks.

The Case for Obama

I have been a supporter of John Edwards since the day after the 2004 election. I supported him because I felt like we needed a change in Washington. We needed someone who wasn't too entrenched with Washington Lobbyists to turn the place upside down. Senator Edwards is one of those few public servants who I feel "get it." From predatory lending to health care, Edwards was the first to jump on these issues and shape the debate of the party.

When Senator Edwards dropped out of the race, I was taken aback! Who should I support now? I actually went back and looked at the candidates on the issues before I made a decision and I started leaning towards one candidate. I watched the debate and started leaning towards another.

Then I started thinking about past elections. Although I was just in elementary school, I clearly remember the 1992 presidential election. That's the first presidential election I actually remember and I recall a young man that accepted our nomination from a place called Hope and I remember the excitement that I felt for this candidate at 7 years old. That man, Bill Clinton, went on to become President and change this country. I want kids all around this country to get the feeling that I did. I moved to the near present and started reflecting about sitting in the Fleet Center in Boston in 2004 and the night before John Kerry accepted the nomination, I remember a country boy from South Carolina assuring us that Hope is on the way. That speech touched me dearly and Senator Edwards has had my support since.

As the old folks used to say back home in Birmingham, Alabama, "I need someone to Hope me!" I need a president that knows the policy end of the Oval Office and will be ready to make the tough decisions but I also need someone that can assure American's fears in this tumultuous time.

From the Iraq War to Education, Barack Obama is the best and most progressive candidate left to beat the Republicans on every issue.

Although I have already voted for John Edwards, my support goes to Senator Barack Obama in hopes that he becomes the next President of The United States of America.

A Unified Party

The past week has been interesting. First we had the departure of Senator John Edwards from the presidential race. Of course this saddened me as well as many others. Senator Edwards has fought for all Americans and has continuously shaped the debate of the primary.

Last night's CNN debate was great! we saw our two potential nominees have an open discussion of the issues that didn't leave anyone bitter and didn't give the Republicans ammunition for the general election.

Although we don't have a nominee yet, I feel like we are at the right place to go forward to beat any Republican in November.

After watching the debate last night, I wonder if someone pulled the coattails of the 3 candidates and told them that they need to get their act together and work toward the common cause.

Hopefully the last time I will talk about Obama and Race.

Obviously race has become a major issue in this campaign and I'm quite sick of it so I have a few things to say.

I find it INSULTING that people want to degrade African Americans who are not supporting Sen. Obama.

The basis of the criticism is pure hypocrisy. How does ANYONE have the testicular fortitude to say anything about a person whose decision to support a candidate is not based on race. Let's look at this scenario....

Average Joe is a white male and decides to support Senator Obama. A Clinton or Edwards supporter criticized Joe for not supporting a white candidate and called him a "nigger lover." The media outlets, bloggers, and activists would go crazy and DEMAND apologies from the campaign as well as the supporter.

I also have issue with the ignorance of supporting Sen Obama just because he is black. I REFUSE to choose a candidate just because of race. There are more important things to look at including elect ability, character, and if the candidate is speaking about issues that are important to me. Too many times have I seen elected officials and activists, including many African Americans who have SOLD US OUT on too many issues that affect us such as payday lending, affordable housing, public housing, gentrification, police brutality, education, and access to affordable health care, to blindly give them my support. For example, I also wouldn't expect myself or any other African American to support George Bush's nominee to the supreme court just because he is black. (Not to call anyone out but it's something to think about)

I would love to see a Black president in the near future, but its more important to me to win and bring about the change that I think will most benefit everyone and Senator Obama is respectfully not my choice.

As a good friend said recently, "What is HOPE? Hope essentially is the by-product of the absence of a definitive PLAN. (i.e. "Lets HOPE we make it to church on time this week...I HOPE the Lakers win tomorrow...I HOPE Obama isn't the democratic nominee") Something Obama's campaign clearly lacks - a plan"

You know, I never marched with King and my parents were in diapers around that time so they didn't either but I do think I remember hearing him say something about judging someone by "the content of their character and not the color of their skin" but what do I know, I'm just a young buck who is wet behind his ears and has a slavery mentality..

I do challenge everyone before they go to the voting booth to look at a few things...
1. What are the platforms of each candidate? Which one most represents you
2. Who is most likely to beat a republican and help down ballot races as well (US Senate and House, governors, and State Legislature races)

If you can honestly answer that your candidate does this, then I can respect you and your choice, but if you can't respect mine, go kick rocks.

Why I think John Edwards can still win the nomination

John Edwards has been polling in 3rd place for months and was often seen as a second tier candidate. Senator Edwards was outspent by Senator Clinton and still managed to beat her in the Iowa Caucuses. A former first lady who had the "establishment" supporting her as well as the former POTUS as well as Secretary of State campaigning for her to be beat by a former Senator who many pundits wrote off is AMAZING!!!

I believe that Senator Clinton will spend a lot of her money attacking Senator Obama in the next few days before the New Hampshire Primary. If Edwards continues a positive message, he may be able to siphon votes from both candidate and make a surprising show in New Hampshire and particularly South Carolina.

Alot of people are supporting Obama because he is black. This is more than about race. This is about electing the person that most represents your values. I must say this as I have been saying for a while as well, HOPE doesn't put food on the table, HOPE doesn't give you a fair mortage, HOPE doesn't give you universal healthcare.

Many people talk about Obama and the black vote, I'm still supporting a candidate who talks about issues that affect African Americans.

Why Blacks won't necessarily back Obama

Mr. Earl Ofari Hutchinson has written an impressive article at The Christian Science Monitor about why Black voters won't necessarily support Barack Obama's campaign for POTUS. Below is an excerpt. I think he brings up some good points and starts a dialouge about Black voters and Obama that isn't dealing with Sen. Obama's "Blackness"

Why blacks won't necessarily back Obama
As recent history proves, political interests trump race.
By Earl Ofari Hutchinson

LOS ANGELES - Political interests trump race. That's the hard lesson likely 2008 presidential candidate Barack Obama will soon learn. Those who think black voters will automatically support one of their own need to think again. Recent history proves that point.

A survey in January 1996 showed that the so-called black president, Bill Clinton, nosed out Jesse Jackson and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in popularity among blacks. Eight years later, when Al Sharpton made his presidential foray in the South Carolina Democratic primary, he barely nudged out eventual Democratic presidential contender John Kerry among black voters. State and national black leaders put their muscle behind Senator Kerry or John Edwards.
In the 2006 midterm elections, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, pro football great Lynn Swann in Pennsylvania, and Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele – all Republicans – banked heavily on getting black voter support to beat their white Democratic opponents in state races. They failed miserably.

Blacks were enraptured with President Clinton and have supported white Democrats for good reason. They believed these seasoned politicians would deliver on their promise to fight for jobs, education, and healthcare. And they either held office or were good bets to win. Interests and electability trumped color.

The same rules apply to Senator Obama. Blacks may puff their chests with pride at the prospect of him breaking racial barriers, but they'll shttp://www2.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=9820158till judge him on two crucial questions. Can he deliver on bread and butter issues? And can he win?

(Click Here for the Entire Article)

My take on Joe Biden

Ok...I hope I only have to write/discuss this once. Everyone has been talking about Joe Biden and his Obama Goof. Let's really look at this....

Did he say the wrong thing? Yes. Was it intentional Yes. Can it be construed to be condescending? Yes Do I give a damn? No

What I belive the Senator meant to say was that Barack Obama is the first mainstream candidate who can articulate the Party's message without sounding like the "Black Candidate" or looking like a radical leftist.

I think we should look beyond that mishap and just work as a party on building a message and policy to win in '08.

Obama and the Religious Right

Sen Barack Obama (D-Illinois) recently spoke at the Saddleback Church (one of the largest "evangelical churches" in the country) on the issues of HIV/AIDS prevention for World Aids Day.

Below is an excerpt from the CNN article.

LAKE FOREST, California (AP) -- Potential presidential candidate Barack Obama stood before one of the country's largest evangelical churches Friday and declared that condoms should be made more widely available to fight AIDS.

The Democratic senator's appearance at Saddleback megachurch was a source of dispute among evangelical leaders, with some of the most conservative saying that a politician who supports abortion rights should not have been allowed to speak at such a prominent church.

Obama urged unity despite political differences to fight the disease that has killed 25 million people since the first case was reported in 1981. About 40 million currently are infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

Click Here for the Entire Article (By the way, If anyone can show me how to create a post where I could link the entire blogpost with the article here I would greatly appreciate it)

Although there were some issues with him speaking at the church, the event was overall a success. If Obama can speak to the Republangelicals (yes I made that up but I think its an appropriate term) this makes him an even more viable candidate. He was able to talk about his faith and not run to the right on the issue. He still discussed the need for easier access to condoms and how theoretically abstinence, until marriage that is, should be the only way, we have to come back to reality. I personally have nothing but respect for anyone who has the... hmmm "testicular fortitude" to get in front of a large evangelical group and talk about safe sex. I also support any candidate who believes in coming off of George Bush's fantasy island and talk about more than abstinence only prevention methods and start talking about promoting the use of condoms