Brief Reflection on 9/11, Then and Now

Never forget the fallen of September Eleven
Seven years ago our nation was hijacked
Never again a day like any other day
Not since the Day of Infamy 60 years before.

Unreal images of fireball and smoke
Attack on plutocratic twin monoliths
Attack on a wall of the Pentagon defense
Tearing down our pride, might and arrogance.

Crashed remains strewn on a green field
To save the hallowed institutions of DC
Heroes of United 93 immortalized.
Could I have been as brave in their place?

Necessitating a swift and firm response
Chased the evil-doers to Tora Bora caves
As near to the gates of hell but
Mission remains unaccomplished.

Bearing false witness and
Distracted by uncertain intelligence
We moved lockstep toward Babylon
Marveling the shock and awe
Ignoring the innocent lives lost and fleeing
Proclaiming mission accomplished
As the death toll rises while
The nation turns to issues domestic.

Now at the precipice of a historic election
Looking for solutions at home and abroad
Same old politics reign again
Accusations of dishonesty and distortion.
One promising change for our future
Other now re-branding maverick change.
Follow the aging senator with POW past?
Or believe in the new face of audacious hope?

Who will honor the fallen of 9/11 and hence
Without mendacity, demagoguery and hypocrisy?
Without reckless zero-sum-game machinations?
Americans and the world watch and wonder
As we remember the eleventh of September.

Quindlen: "The GOP Finds Feminism"

Didn't seem right to bury this Anna Quindlen article as a comment to another post. This one deserves another post in that Palin is to feminism as Clarence Thomas was to affirmative action. THIS is the sort of "doublespeak" and political truth-twisting at which the Reps excel. All the coddling and kid gloves used by the McCain camp to prevent any gaffes by Palin is an insult to feminism and is by itself a practice of sexism. Cue the Thompson Twins' "Lies": The GOP Finds Feminism

Liberal Media Bias?

From: Brian Adamson
Subject: Liberal Media Bias?
Date: Monday, September 8, 2008, 11:37 AM

Hi: Really agree with this article. Let me know what you-all think?

We're Gonna Frickin' Lose this Thing (Adam McKay: The Huffington Post)

"Stop saying that!" my wife says to me. But this is not a high school football game and I'm not a cheerleader with a bad attitude. This is an election and as things stand now, we're gonna frickin' lose this thing. Obama and McCain at best are even in the polls nationally and in a recent Gallup poll McCain is ahead by four points.

Something is not right. We have a terrific candidate and a terrific VP candidate. We're coming off the worst eight years in our country's history. Six of those eight years the Congress, White House and even the Supreme Court were controlled by the Republicans and the last two years the R's have filibustered like tantrum throwing 4-year-olds, yet we're going to elect a Republican who voted with that leadership 90% of the time and a former sportscaster who wants to teach Adam and Eve as science? That's not odd as a difference of opinion, that's logically and mathematically queer.

It reminds me of playing blackjack (a losers game). You make all the right moves, play the right hands but basically the House always wins. I know what you're going to say " But I won twelve hundred dollars last year in Atlantic City!" Of course there are victories. The odds aren't tilted crazy, but there is a 51%-49% advantage. And in the long run, the house has to win. The house will win.

So what is this house advantage the Republicans have? It's the press. There is no more fourth estate. Wait, hold on...I'm not going down some esoteric path with theories on the deregulation of the media and corporate bias and CNN versus Fox...I mean it: there is no more functioning press in this country. And without a real press the corporate and religious Republicans can lie all they want and get away with it. And that's the 51% advantage.

Think this is some opinion being wryly posited to titillate other bloggers and inspire dialogue with Tucker Carlson or Gore Vidal? Fuck that. Four corporations own all the TV channels. All of them. If they don't get ratings they get canceled or fired. All news is about sex, blame and anger, and fear. Exposing lies about amounts of money taken from lobbyists and votes cast for the agenda of the last eight years does not rate. The end.

So one side can lie and get away with it. Now let's throw in one more advantage. Voter caging and other corruption on the local level with voting. Check out the article here on HuffPost about Ohio messing with 600K voters. If only five thousand of those voters don't or can't vote that's a huge advantage in a contest that could be decided by literally dozens of votes. That takes us to about a 52 to 48% advantage.

I'm not even getting into the fact that the religious right teaches closed mindedness so it's almost impossible to gain new voters from their pool because people who disagree with them are agents of the devil. I just want to look at two inarguable realities: A) we have no more press and B) the Repubs are screwing with the voters on the local level.

I'm telling you, we're going to lose this thing. And afterwords we'll blame ourselves the same way we did with Gore and Kerry (two candidates a thousand times more qualified to lead than W Bush.) Just watch.. McCain wins by a point or two and we all walk around saying things like "Obama was too well spoken." "Biden wasn't lovable enough." "I shouldn't have split those eights." "Why did I hit on 16? Why?!"

So what do we do?

1) We give definitive clear speeches like Biden and Obama gave the other day about how no one talked about any issues at the Republican Convention and how they outright lied. But we do them over and over again. 2) We use the one place where it's still a 50-50 game -- the internet -- as much as we can. 3) But most importantly we should bring up re-regulating the media and who owns it and what that conflict of interest is a lot more. By pretending there's no conflict of interest we're failing to alert the public that they're being lied to or given a looking at a coin at the bottom of a pool slanted truth. Every time a pundit or elected official is on any TV news program it should be a polite formality to mention that GE has made such and such billions off the war in Iraq by selling arms or that Murdoch is a right-wing activist with a clear stake in who wins and who taxes his profits the least. Disney, GE, Viacom, and Murdoch -- all want profits and the candidate and agenda that will get in their way the least.

Obama and Biden should also create a "master sound bite sentence" and repeat it hundreds of times. It should be so true that even the corporations can't screw with it when it makes the airwaves. Here's my attempt: "Katrina, four dollar gas, a trillion dollar war, rising unemployment, deregulated housing market, global warming...no more."

This race should be about whether the Republican Party is going to be dismantled or not after the borderline treason of the past eight years. But instead it is about making the word "community organizer" a dirty word and a beauty queen who shoots foxes from a plane. Someone is not in any way doing their job and it's the press. Or more specifically, that job no longer exists.

Probably the worst offenders are the pundits who take the position that it's all just a game and say phrases like "getting a post-convention bump" or "playing to the soccer Moms." This isn't a game of Monopoly or Survivor. There are real truths that exist outside of the spin they are given and have an effect on lives. 250,000 Iraqi civilians are dead because we let our reality be distorted by the most effective propaganda machine in fifty years, the corporate American press. Money and jobs are flying out of this country as our currency becomes worthless and we're talking about the fact that McCain is a veteran. If someone busted into your house and robbed you would you then forgive them if you found out they were a veteran? Of course not. So why are we forgiving McCain for selling out his country by supporting the Bush agenda?

This is it folks. If McCain takes power we fade and become Australia in the seventies: a backwoods country with occasional flashes of relevance. Except we've got a way bigger military and we're angrier. People will get hurt and we'll pay the bill for the bullets. I'm telling you, unless we wake up, we're gonna lose this frickin' thing.

How the Republicans Win

A quite thorough article about the roots and schemes of the Reps to win the presidency over the last 40 years, by Robert Parry of Consortium News: How the Republicans Win.

I found it educational and accurate. I blame the Reps, but I also blame the Dems for their choosing indirectly complicit silence over cries of outrage. I also blame all of us for blindly accepting the state of the nation as it was and is. This is how long the country has been on the wrong track. Wake up, America! The Revolution WILL BE TELEVISED!

Sarah's Big Night Palin Comparison to Obama

It's beyond laughable that the Reps insist on comparing Palin to Obama (ok, so I've been dying to use the "pale in comparison" pun ever since she came on the scene). She's hardly qualified to be VP, and they claim Obama does not have any experience to be president (O those haunting refrain of "Zero, zero, zero"!). It's also ridiculous how the media are now fawning all over her barely mediocre speech of no substance or content. And there's no doubt where the "fair and balanced" mouthpieces stand: see Politico article Media swoons over Palin's fiery speech. An AP article even has the headline, "Palin delivers star-turning performance at RNC". To be sure, there's no substitute for low expectations. Giuliani even said the presidency is decided not by the elite or Hollywood celebrities but by the American people. The elite and celebs who live in this country are not Americans? Yet another example of infrahumanization by the Reps. America doesn't want some Ivy League-educated president? That should've disqualified the entire Bush family by default. The Reps love to bash the liberal elite and the Hollywood celebs, but they love a lying political performance even more.

It was difficult to watch the typical elite-hating, media-bashing, liberal-baiting, flag-waving circus the Reps like to put on. I did love the part where she took credit for Alaska's budget surplus (boy, that's feat in pipeline country) and how she put the state jet for sale on eBay (this here Internet is somethin' else). As I've heard other people say, we are the laughing stock of the world. But, hey, the GOP will never apologize for America! Yeah, good luck with that.

At the Politico site above, I particularly enjoyed this rundown of RNC myths vs. facts by a Democratic responder:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform _ not even in the state senate."
THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded. Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families. He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson.
THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state _ by population.

MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."
THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right _ change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington _ throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John McCain...is this the best the fascists on the right can do?

That last line is from the blogger, not me. It's the same ol' negative campaigning from the right. How could it be anything else, regardless of what Obama and even McCain try to do to keep it on the issues? Oh, right, I forgot:
"This election is not about issues," Davis told The Washington Post this week. "This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates."

It's time for "It's the economy, stupid", part II.

Beware of Rove-ellian Trojan Horse

Here's a very interesting article from The New Republic I found. As I have mulled over the Palin pick in my head over the last few days, I believe the Dems and liberals are falling over themselves into the Rove-ellian political trap:
The Case Against the Case Against Palin

The article ends with this:
"Sarah Palin is a living reminder that the ultimate source of political power in this country is not the Kennedy School or the Davos Summit or an Ariana Huffington salon; even now, power emanates from the electorate itself. More precisely, power in 2008 emanates from the working class electorates of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Sooner or later, the Obama camp will realize that the beauty pageant queen is an enormously talented populist in a year that is ripe for populism. For their own sake, it had better be sooner."

The McCain camp has managed to re-define the theme of this election once again by re-invigorating the Culture War: Palin reignites culture wars

This is why they picked someone like her. She represents a lightningrod, a liberal flystrip, if you prefer, that will make all those left-wing liberals who attack her look like they're elitists alienating the working-class, heartland 'Mericans. Obama camp had better watch out and step around this political excrement-in-a-flaming-paper-bag that the Rove Sith-apprentices have put down on their doorstep. This is like "Bob Roberts" politics where an assassination (a character assassination in this case) is faked, and liberals are all too easy targets to fall for it.

Palin symbolizes the return to "God, guns and gays" political game at which the Reps are experts. This is a Simpsons' episode where the townfolk chant "Monorail!" in the Music Man cadence; a South Park episode where the townfolk misplace their anger shouting, "Dey took 'r jobs!" The Dems cannot compete in this game because the 'Merican public will never accept liberals as the defenders of their beliefs, values or culture. And don't forget the good ol' conservative whipping boy, the liberal media. McCain camp knows this and knows that this is the only way that the Reps can stranglehold the presidency.

It is truly despicable that they are going down this road again, but will the third time be the charm? I can officially declare that I have zero respect for McCain. Maverick? Hardly, just another opportunistic politician who will do and say anything to be president. Maverick McCain died a quick death prior the 2008 election season. It is also quite sickening to see the Reps pat themselves on the back for putting Palin on the ticket, as if they have accomplished something new and progressive, as if she somehow can even be a torchbearer for the "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling" that Hillary created.

The best course of action for Obama-Biden is to stay away from the culture war trap (as I saw Biden say repeatedly on C-SPAN tonight, "Children are off-limits!"), and let Palin be Palin. Looks like she's got a lot of political loose ends with which to fashion a noose for herself: See Campaign money hurts Palin's outsider image. I realize it'd be highly unlikely and a political suicide, but I'll go out on a limb to say that Palin's VP nominee days may be numbered.

Plus, the latest Gallup poll says Obama has hit the 50% mark. Mere post-convention bump perhaps, but thank the Lord at least half of the country is able to see through the Rove-ellian politics-as-usual smokescreen.

Who is Sarah Palin?

Hey check this out.

Dear MoveOn member,

Yesterday was John McCain's 72nd birthday. If elected, he'd be the oldest president ever inaugurated. And after months of slamming Barack Obama for "inexperience," here's who John McCain has chosen to be one heartbeat away from the presidency: a right-wing religious conservative with no foreign policy experience, who until recently was mayor of a town of 9,000 people.

Huh?

Who is Sarah Palin? Here's some basic background:

• She was elected Alaska's governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.¹
  
• Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.²
  
• She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000. ³
  
• Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.⁴
  
• She's doesn't think humans are the cause of climate change.⁵
  
• She's solidly in line with John McCain's "Big Oil first" energy policy. She's pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won't be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.⁶
• How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.⁷

This is information the American people need to see. Please take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family.

McCain-Palin Ticket

I'll give McCain one thing; I didn't see this pick coming AT ALL! I only heard of her last night on C-SPAN as they ran down a list of speakers at the RNC. I think he's really going out on a limb.

First thing I mentioned to Michelle when I heard the pick: They want to make Biden look like he's attacking women when they get in a debate.
Second: Does this really woo the unhappy Hillary supporters or women in general?
Third: The ol' "heartbeat away from the presidency" question. If the Reps think Obama is inexperienced, does Palin have the creds to backup a 72-year-old presidential nominee? Major stumbling block here, I think.
Fourth: I guess the evangelicals and conservatives like Palin's stance on issues, but anti-abortion isn't the way to get the women vote.

Forces some tactical adjustments for Obama-Biden in the short term (I bet they didn't see her coming, either), but in the long run VP picks end up being neutral. However, Biden backs up Obama much, much better than Palin does McCain. She seems hollow, token and purely a move in political campaign terms, not at all about how qualified she is to lead the second-in-command position. Too bad for Mitt Romney, but Hillary didn't get the VP nod, either.

Obama-Biden Ticket

The VP gauntlet has been dropped from the Dem side, so what do you all think? I think it is a good and perhaps safe pick. McCain camp has already started to spin on the lack of foreign policy experience and going against the change agent message of Obama, but I think Biden is a good bulldog against Rep attacks. McCain camp is also courting seriously the disaffected Hillary voters, but those (some say up to 25% of her supporters who would now vote for McCain), I would argue, were not really core Dems, mostly independents and maybe some Reps who are Bush-haters.

Anyway, let's chime in, as the Dem convention is now rolling...

Fwd: Continuing on Edwards et al.

From BRM via googlegroups...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Brian Menard" <brian_men...@hotmail.com>
Date: Aug 11 2008, 1:06 pm
Subject: Continuing on Edwards et al.
To: AMoMaI Group

Glad we agree, and that's with bipartisan culpability. (My beef with
Larry Craig is not the orientation of his activity, but the hypocrisy
factor. As for Gingrich, I respect the heck out of his great brain,
diagnostic ability, and strategizing, but he'll never be President
because he can't - or at least couldn't - keep his pants on. To his
credit though, he admitted things and resigned where others have not.)

As for Europe, I would argue that in fact, there IS a big difference
in moral expectations between the USA and Europe, not only with public
figures, but perhaps BECAUSE there is so much more toleration of such
things in many European cultures generally. Religion does figure in,
but not in the sense of right wing control of U.S. politics; I believe
it's more a matter of religion NOT playing so much an active part in
European culture.

As for damning politicians for sleeping around, I think John Edwards
said it best himself when he finally started to admit to a teeny-
weenie little part of what I suspect he will ultimately have to admit
to despite continuing to deny it (as he lied with a straight face just
a few months ago about the fact that any infidelity at all took
place). In his ABC interview, he said essentially that there is a
hubris that comes from a sense of invincibility and all-powerfulness
that seduces one into thinking that he can do anything that he wants
without culpability. THAT is very dangerous in public office,
especially the most powerful office in the world.

BRM

RE: Politics: Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News

Well, he's definitely a huge heel here, but I think we can also all agree that neither party has the upper hand in matters of virtue, morals or family values. :)

MLB

---

From: brian_menard@hotmail.com
To: b.adamson@comcast.net; misterb_46@hotmail.com; yhkpenguin@yahoo.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: Re: Politics: Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2008 10:22:54 -0400

And, I would add, also a shame that Edwards took such advantage of his wife's health circumstances for political gain while he was otherwise involved with extracurricular activity. Any agree?

BRM

Re: Politics: Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News

And, I would add, also a shame that Edwards took such advantage of his wife's health circumstances for political gain while he was otherwise involved with extracurricular activity. Any agree?

BRM

----- Original Message -----

From: Young H. Kim

To: Brian Menard ; Brian Adamson ; Michael Busick

Cc: amomai blog

Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 7:20 PM

Subject: Fw: Politics: Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News

Well, well, the other shoe drops...but no admission of fathering the child. Boy, he's learned a few things from Clinton, I suppose. What a shame that I have to admit that Fox and the Enquirer were right. Ugh! Young --- On Fri, 8/8/08, NYTimes.com <nytdirect@nytimes.com> wrote: ---------------------------------------- The Caucus Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE In an interview, former Senator John Edwards said he had an extramarital affair but did not father a child out of wedlock. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/abc-news-edwards-admits-to-extramarital-affair/index.html?nl=pol&emc=pol

Fw: Politics: Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News

Well, well, the other shoe drops...but no admission of fathering the child. Boy, he's learned a few things from Clinton, I suppose. What a shame that I have to admit that Fox and the Enquirer were right. Ugh! Young --- On Fri, 8/8/08, NYTimes.com <nytdirect@nytimes.com> wrote: ---------------------------------------- The Caucus Edwards Admits Affair to ABC News By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE In an interview, former Senator John Edwards said he had an extramarital affair but did not father a child out of wedlock. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/abc-news-edwards-admits-to-extramarital-affair/index.html?nl=pol&emc=pol

Fwd: Response to Young's Carter comment

From BRM via googlegroups...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Brian Menard" <brian_men...@hotmail.com>
Date: Jul 30 2008, 5:30 pm
Subject: Response to Young's Carter comment
To: AMoMaI Group

From my end of things, Carter had good reason to be defensive. The
"misery index" that he created to lambaste Ford in '76 had grown to a
double-digit albatross hanging around his own neck by '80. Foreign
affairs were a disaster. And things were a mess at home. Worst of
all, there was DISCO! Can't we blame that on Carter as well? BA, I
won't touch the ABBA thing; I know that wasn't your fault despite an
ethnic affiliation.

BRM

Re: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

You mean his new "documentary".

BRM

----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Adamson

To: Brian Menard ; Young H. Kim ; Brian Adamson ; Michael Busick

Cc: amomai blog

Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 11:07 AM

Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

I'd not considered that T. Boone Pickens might join the Obama camp. Yeah, that would be a brilliant PR move. Actually, I'm hoping Oliver Stone's new movie "W" will have a greater influence. Talk about a master propagandist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg7vwicPx98

BA

Just curious: Does anyone else think that the T. Boone Pickens push
of the last couple weeks will be a brilliant and strategic free
advertisement for Obama when Pickens ultimately endorses Obama during the
general campaign? I agree with the need for developing renewable energy
resources beyond (not in place of) expanding current energy efforts, but I won't
be surprised when Pickens outs himself in the Obama camp.

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Might want to check-out the Mayhill Fowler's piece on the Huffington post - not entirely positive- seemed fair and balanced to me.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/baracks-berlin-gamble_b_115312.html

BA

________________________________
From: misterb_46@hotmail.com
To: brian_menard@hotmail.com; yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; b.adamson@comcast.net; briada@hotmail.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:11:18 -0700

OK, but the guys on Fox & Friends (according to a clip on the Daily Show last week) showed Obama in front of German monument and wasted no time comparing his location and speech to that of Hitler back in the day.

Like a lot of folks these days, I only get my national news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. :)

MB

________________________________

From: brian_menard@hotmail.com
To: yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; misterb_46@hotmail.com; b.adamson@comcast.net; briada@hotmail.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: Re: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:17:02 -0400

Actually, your dear friends at Fox News (real news portions, not opinion shows, and not Obermaneque "opinion pretending to be news" shows) did the best job of covering Obama on the trip (while also getting digs in at their ABC/CBS/NBC rivals for their giddy fawning coverage) with actual reporters reporting what happened, with whom he met, what was discussed, and what reactions come from it all. I agree that the European coverage, by and large, was more focused than the Americans' star struck coverage. That included telling about how his German crowd got pretty quiet when Obama said Europe needed to step up and do their part in Afghanistan (for which I give him great credit). Didn't catch much of that here, but maybe I missed it in my channel surfing between the "big three" majors, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and FOX.

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Let's face it - Obama screwed up by not visiting the hospitalized soldiers in Germany. One can only wonder what his true motivations were? Downer, little scary, perhaps he didn't want to face the reality of sacrifices made for a war that he did not start? Who knows... Can't defend Obama on this one. I think he made a mistake that will haunt him.

BA

---

From: brian_menard@hotmail.com
To: yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; b.adamson@comcast.net; briada@hotmail.com; misterb_46@hotmail.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: Re: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:57:18 -0400

That could be what really happened, though my understanding tweaks a little differently: the Pentagon told him HE was most welcome to come but the media entourage had to stay out, at which point the campaign chose not to put him one-on-one with the soldiers in the hospital. Two versions of the same story? How could it be in our blessed media age?

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael Busick

To: Brian Menard ; Young H. Kim ; Brian Adamson ; Brian Adamson

Cc: amomai blog

Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 10:09 PM

Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Actually, I'm tired of reading how the media is in favor of either of them over the other.

There's no convention in sight and we still have three months to go so it seems like the media is grasping for any story they can find. This Europe trip. That biopsy. This magazine cover. That trip to Pennsylvania.

As I understand Obama's aborted trip to Germany, the Pentagon asked him not to do it. Wherever he goes, he's going to have cameras whether he wants them or not (Wailing Wall for example) so I don't see how he really has to ask for them.

Enough already -- until the conventions.

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

OK, but the guys on Fox & Friends (according to a clip on the Daily Show last week) showed Obama in front of German monument and wasted no time comparing his location and speech to that of Hitler back in the day.

Like a lot of folks these days, I only get my national news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. :)

MB

---

From: brian_menard@hotmail.com
To: yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; misterb_46@hotmail.com; b.adamson@comcast.net; briada@hotmail.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: Re: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:17:02 -0400

Actually, your dear friends at Fox News (real news portions, not opinion shows, and not Obermaneque "opinion pretending to be news" shows) did the best job of covering Obama on the trip (while also getting digs in at their ABC/CBS/NBC rivals for their giddy fawning coverage) with actual reporters reporting what happened, with whom he met, what was discussed, and what reactions come from it all. I agree that the European coverage, by and large, was more focused than the Americans' star struck coverage. That included telling about how his German crowd got pretty quiet when Obama said Europe needed to step up and do their part in Afghanistan (for which I give him great credit). Didn't catch much of that here, but maybe I missed it in my channel surfing between the "big three" majors, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and FOX.

----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Adamson

To: Brian Menard ; Young H. Kim ; Michael Busick ; Brian Adamson

Cc: amomai blog

Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 10:52 PM

Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Brian M.

"Though I'm buried with reading and writing for a class, I can't sit out any longer on all the "media are for McCain" comments. Are we really in such different worlds that you guys think the media are shilling for McCain when Obama just did his superstar world tour with the three major network anchors and their accompanying entourages in tow? In my world, all their attention gave him a nice poll bump, though he somehow seems to have managed to lose much of it again in just a couple days despite all the fawning media efforts to help him any way they can."

Sorry, but I've got to comment on the above topic.

Yes, we really are in different worlds... Because, left-wingers are focusing on the story around the story. The story as told by the corporate media was Obama as "Rock Star" - - McCain criticizes Obama for not going overseas and then criticizes him for going overseas - - Looks like grandpa is the flip-flopper.

The media story was about the media covering the story. What is enlightening though is how little the media actually covered Obama, what Obama did and what Obama said. Instead the media was the message. The story was all about how big the story was. So, we're all left with the knowledge that Obama went to Europe and took an entourage of media with him to cover his big trip? What did we actually learn about that trip? What was actually covered? Just the story about how big the story was? How bizarre. Look at how Obama was covered in Europe. In Europe Obama was the story; In America the medias coverage of Obama was the story. Remember, Neil Postmans landmark book on television, "The medium is the message."

Brian Adamson

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Since Pickens had a lot to do with the financing of the Swiftboating of Kerry in 2004, I'd like to think he's trying to make up for that now. :)

If Pickens is serious about his energy ideas -- and it sounds like he is -- I believe he'll support whichever candidate is more in line with his goals.

MB

---

From: brian_menard@hotmail.com
To: briada@hotmail.com; yhkpenguin@yahoo.com; b.adamson@comcast.net; misterb_46@hotmail.com
CC: yhkpenguin.amomai@blogger.com
Subject: Re: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:05:46 -0400

Just curious: Does anyone else think that the T. Boone Pickens push of the last couple weeks will be a brilliant and strategic free advertisement for Obama when Pickens ultimately endorses Obama during the general campaign? I agree with the need for developing renewable energy resources beyond (not in place of) expanding current energy efforts, but I won't be surprised when Pickens outs himself in the Obama camp.

----- Original Message -----

From: Michael Busick

To: Brian Adamson ; Young H. Kim ; Brian Menard ; Brian Adamson

Cc: amomai blog

Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 10:38 PM

Subject: RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

Yeah, what should Obama's group work on first: bringing the worst of this current administration to "justice" (we all know at worst it will be vacations in white-collar prisons) or trying to fix an economy stalled in 20th-century thinking (forget pre-9/11 thinking nonsense) while the rest of the developed world catches us and passes us?

The America of the good old days would seize on a chance to show the world how we can lead on wind and solar power innovations, but this administration (and McCain because he doesn't seem to know any better) whines and stomps its feet when it can't just dig bigger holes in the ground and sea whenever it wants to -- like it used to.

I don't mind more research into safer nuclear power (does that mean this administration wants to finally stop picking on France), but it's beyond time to look for more places to drill for oil and dig for coal and oil shale. Wind, water, and solar power will be around a lot longer than anything else and (IMHO) it doesn't look as bad when we try to build things to take advantage of wind, water, and solar power.

MB

RE: Is Obama Another Jimmy Carter?

I'd not considered that T. Boone Pickens might join the Obama camp. Yeah, that would be a brilliant PR move. Actually, I'm hoping Oliver Stone's new movie "W" will have a greater influence. Talk about a master propagandist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg7vwicPx98

BA

Just curious: Does anyone else think that the T. Boone Pickens push
of the last couple weeks will be a brilliant and strategic free
advertisement for Obama when Pickens ultimately endorses Obama during the
general campaign? I agree with the need for developing renewable energy
resources beyond (not in place of) expanding current energy efforts, but I won't
be surprised when Pickens outs himself in the Obama camp.

BRM