6
POPSHillary's Own Sexism
Although there is a lot of talk about sexism, and how it is to blame for Hillary's defeat, I think people are barking up the wrong tree. Obama never campaigned against Hillary on the basis that as a woman she would be "unelectable" because conservative "swing voters" would never elect a woman. On the other hand, she did make that case against Obama on account of his race. In fact, nobody ever questioned Hillary's ability to lead the country, as a woman or otherwise. The should have: her foreign policy is scary and ignorant. But the most sexist person in the race was Hillary herself. Her campaign, with the pant-suits and tough guy attitude (especially on Iran) seemed to reflect her own belief that if a woman was going to win, she had to convince people that she was "one of the guys." I think almost anyone who would vote for Obama would also vote for a woman - if it was the right woman. What I'm not willing to do is vote for any woman simply for the sake of making history.
5
POPSThe Jew Problem Let's see how many people click on that title! I hope I have your attention now, because this is important! Some politically active Jews, although certainly passionate, often have trouble telling friend from foe. The belief among Jews that the Christian Fundamentalist Evangelical community is a friend is a big mistake. Some worry that Obama is part of the nation of Islam, or Palestinian, or that he won't help Israel. But they think the GOP will. But what is the Christian Right's agenda in helping Israel? Clearly, right-wing evangelical fundamentalists like Hagee have no tenderness or fondness for Jews. They believe Israel is simply a part of God's ultimate plan leading to the apocalypse. Although they support the Jews returning to Israel, they also believe it is Biblical prophecy that there will be continuous warfare, so they don't support peace, but an Israel besieged. Many believe this is the prelude to the final destruction of the Jews by a wrathful God.
10
POPSMcCain: A Critical Weakness on Foreign Policy McCain's critical weakness on foreign policy is that he knows next to nothing about it. Although I have a lot of respect of McCain, I think he falls into the typical trap of myopic patriotism. Many people love their own country so much that they are blind to the reality of the world outside their borders. The outside world is a place where America is a pretty good nation, but has certainly seen better days. The outside world is a place where our enemies occasionally have legitimate points, and certainly have lives and families much like our own. In the reality beyond our borders, the US isn't guaranteed to win every fight, especially when we go in on shaky ground. In the reality beyond our borders everyone has to talk, whether they like it or not, because in the end, nations, like people, are created equal. McCain knows everything about the US Military, but knows nothing about our enemies. With a perspective like that, how can we expect to win?
5
POPSThe Way the Race Card Plays... For all the (disturbing) talk about how being black is bad for the Democratic party, nobody seems to be noticing that it also has its good sides. I mean, people worry about Obama's abilty to capture the working class white vote, but why doesn't anyone worry about Hillary's (rapidly diminishing) ability to capture the black vote? After all, by campaigning on the idea that a black man can't represent America, isn't she destroying her ability to get the black vote? (Not to mention white votes, like mine, that are really frightened by that kind of rhetoric?) What I love about an Obama McCain election is that it scrambles the map. Some blue states would definitely prefer McCain, while some red states are certainly leaning towards Obama. At last, we have a chance to break down America's polarization.
11
POPSThe New Face of Racism: Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton may well be the youngest living Dixiecrat. Basically, her campaign strategy has come down to this: 1. There are lots of Americans who would vote against a person based on the color of his skin. (I bet you can't guess which color they "aren't quite ready for"!) 2. These people are so important to the Democratic Party that we should on no account offend their delicate sensibilities by fielding an, ehm, colored candidate. 3. By virtue of her being white, she has the key character trait that appeals to the DNC base, which is the ability to pander to the much vaunted "Racist Redneck" demographic. Are her values in line with the Democratic Party? They certainly don't represent me! In fact, I would prefer it if racists didn't vote for the candidate I support. After all, nobody is looking for the David Duke endorsement!
4
POPSDemocracy Saves America's Reputation The great thing about America is not that we are a perfect country, but that we are always a redeemable one. We have a certain mercurial charm (not to mention idiosyncratic way of doing things) that somehow manages to bring us back from the brink. The world will never truly hate us, because we can and do change. And somehow, America has a knack for putting its best foot forward at just the right crucial moment. Roger Cohen, also, is a shining example of editorial journalism in an age of glib semi-literate rants. He takes in the whole world, and manages to make sense of it, noticing all the right details.
4
POPSApocalypse Iraq (Now, and probably for another 20 to 30 years.) Here are some quotes from the congressional hearings, by Senators Clinton, Obama, McCain and Willard to Generals Petraeus and Kurtz. ;) Obama, in my opinion, made the most salient point: we will not be able to get everything we want from Iraq. We need to be honest about that. For the past three years, Bush has shown no strategy aside from throwing more American blood and treasure into the vacum of chaos he created. He is biding his time, simply prolonging the disaster so he won't have to suffer the indignity of retreat. He's saving that for his hapless successor. The disgusting truth is that, while we can't get everything we want from Iraq, it don't have to lose so much. Allow me to outline the compromises I think we need to make:
9
POPSLosing Hearts and Minds; Empowering Extremism Before anyone asks why we aren't winning the War on Terror yet, consider these sad headlines. All around the world, reasonable people are being dragged into the slipstream of extremism. The cause is blatant moral bankruptcy. Greed, corruption and exploitation, fortified behind the twin bastions of ignorance and righteousness, are discrediting the institutions that are instrumental in overcoming extremism, intolerance, and global violence. Particularly America remains the store house of the world's hopes and dreams. We are not merely a nation but an ideal, and we must live up to our promise. Obama and McCain are both men of admirable morals and transparent character. Meanwhile, as Hillary obfuscates over her finances, we must realize she lacks the moral authority needed to restore America's international credibility. Being Righteous is not nearly as important as being Right.
3
POPSIn Defense of Caucusing I am disappointed that nobody is making the obvious counterpoint to all of Hillary's sour grapes over the caucuses. As I see it, caucuses represent one of the best functions of democracy. Why? Because it entails community dialog. I think more voting should be done like this. If I vote privately, I don't have to think about what I'm doing, or its repercussions on the community, and I don't need to justify my decision. As a result, voting by ballot often becomes a selfish, isolated and disconnected experience. In a caucus you discuss your position with your friends and neighbors and, drawing on that communal wisdom, reach a consensus. Imagine if all voting were conducted this way? We would be a much more conscientious nation as a whole. However, this is specifically ill-suited to Hillary's "I'm right, to hell with you" vision of leadership. Perhaps she is losing caucuses because it is hard to justify voting for her. Anyway, Democracy always works better with free pizza!
5
POPSRalph Nader: Clueless Egomanica Ralph Nader represents everything that is indulgent, self-congratulatory, and ultimately ineffective about our nation's activist community. He is busy implicitly comparing himself to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. while he is woefully short on valuable political analysis. Obama hits the nail on the head here: Nader doesn't actually understand politics. Anyone who thought Gore and Bush were the same ought to be feeling pretty sheepish after over 6 years of uninterrupted warfare on multiple fronts, economic crisis, financial collapse, and rapacious Nero-esque indulgence from the Bush administration. Nader couldn't have been more wrong. There is nobody quite like George W. Bush! (Thank goodness!)
0
POPSSeattle's Byzantine Primary System There are good reasons why our primary is seldom, and probably shouldn't be relevant. First, is because Washington State is largely full of people who are willfully out of touch with national trends. We're independent, and most often not interested in following the rest of the nation. Something that is taken for granted as conventional wisdom in Seattle's overwhelmingly liberal voting public would be highly controversial elsewhere. That's why we elect the nation's most radical congressman by margins of up to 80%. In Republican areas Washingtonians are no different - we all love crazy people who make no attempt to moderate their ideals. (Me included, I must confess.) The second reason we shouldn't matter is that our primary system is so complex, redundant and useless it could only have been developed by Microsoft's web developers. (More on this in comments...)
1
POPSPutting Huckabee in Perspective: Understanding Caucuses Although various people have come up with various interpretations of the Huckabee (almost all of which reinforce the positions they held to begin with...) they have all overlooked one critical element: This was a caucus primary! What does this mean? It means that, a certain number of people who woke up that morning had decided already that they were going to support a republican but they didn't know who. They then went to the caucuses, and talked with their neighbors for an afternoon, and slowly, the candidates with less support were eliminated in favor of those with more. Like an endless series of run-off elections, with your friends and neighbors acting as cheer leaders, it finally comes down to one. This means that Huckabee had the most zealous and energetic adherents among the voters so conservative that they defacto caucus for the GOP. While most moderates are swinging behind Obama, it seems like Huckabee is simply cashing in on the influence of the fringe in primaries.
9
POPSTears for the future... You know I hate to admit it, but it's true. Obama may be a "rock star" (although he's no Jim Morrison) and he may be a great guy (although he's no Bobby Kennedy) I have to agree: on the hard issues, he hasn't shown us that he has what it takes. This was exactly the failure of Royale (Sego) in France. The sad thing is that, although it took me years of college and field research to do it the hard way, I estimate that with the resources of a national politician, and about $25,000,000 it would only take about three or four months of intensive study to come up to speed on the relevant facts of Islamic "terrorism" and the situation in Iraq, both military and civilian. Why is it that I some how feel that quite a few of the people on Clipmarks are more qualified to lead the country than any of the people currently running? (Both left and right!) Come to think of it, why aren't any of you guys running? How long will it be before we get an erudite, informed and passionate leader?
Newest Clips
see Newest Clips
7
Latest Pops
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Tags
Print
Save
Turn on live update