Help Classify The Huck Behind The Upchuck

I've been thinking about where I fall out on the issues of the day and then wondering where it locates me on the ideological spectrum. On balance, I know I'm left of center; but there are some things I hold that some might say place me squarely right of center. Of course, I maintain that all of my positions make me a Liberal -- at least in the classical sense of the term. But, I'd like to get you involved in helping me to figure out my ideological classification. Let me try a little experiment. If all you knew of me were the following items, how would you classify me:

Some Demographic Data:
(1) I am 40 years old.
(2) I am a Southerner born and raised in New Orleans.
(3) I am a white male.
(4) I have a mortgage.
(5) I earn a modest, middle-class, mid-range 5 figure salary.

Some Educational Data:
(1) I attended private school literally my entire academic life.
(2) 70% of my education comes through private Catholic institutions, undergraduate college included.
(3) I am a college professor and administrator in an Area Studies Program (Latin American Studies, to be exact)
(4) My disciplinary formation is mostly in Political Science and International Relations.

Some Social Data:
(1) I am a Catholic Christian who pays close heed to the Social Justice Teachings of the Catholic Church.
(2) I am married for 15 years and am father to two young children (ages 10 and 6).
(3) Divorce is not an option for me. And I think divorce is the primary cause of the breakdown of the family.

Some Issues Data:
(1) I enthusiastically supported Barack Obama for President and am just thrilled that he will be our next President.
(2) I am pro-life in the fullest meaning of the term; but I do not support government involvement in deciding a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy and I certainly do not think that abortion is a criminal behavior and do not consider abortion to be the functional equivalent of pre-meditated murder. I am categorically opposed to the death penalty. I generally tend not to support embryonic stem cell research when adult stem cell research offers similar promises for stem cell research breakthroughs. I oppose killing through warfare. I categorically and unequivocally oppose torture of any kind -- and this includes any kind of "enhanced interrogation techniques."
(3) I support gay marriage and I think of this as a civil right. I think the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy regarding gays in the military is an abomination and should be instantly repealed in favor of allowing gay people the right to serve openly in the military as a gay person. I think the Defense of Marriage Act and the Federal Marriage Amendment movement are inappropriate and unjust efforts to codify discrimination into our law and our constitution. And I oppose both.
(4) I don't like paying too much taxes. I have a sympathetic orientation to the idea of a "flat tax." But, I also understand and find a certain logic to the social justice and utilitarian arguments for progressive taxation.
(5) I generally think that local solutions to commonly-shared problems among local communities is more preferable to federal government solutions; but I think that the federal government does have an obligation to step in where markets don't or won't perform in meeting the basic needs of individuals, and particularly those individuals most marginalized by circumstance and environments over which they exercise very little control.
(6) I think healthcare is a fundamental human right, and that the state should ensure some kind of quality healthcare for all of its citizens, i.e. universal healthcare.
(7) I am pro-"amnesty," if not exactly pro-open borders, when it comes to immigration policy.
(8) I generally think unions are inefficient and corrupt; but I do believe in the rights and the justice of workers organizing and engaging in collective bargaining to secure greater shares of the profits that come from the fruits of their labor.
(9) I think the concept of "tenure" in academia is overrated and mostly unnecessary to protect academic freedom; but I believe 100% in academic freedom and the preservation of it.
(10) I support public charter schools, but oppose school vouchers that will allow public funds to pay for private school tuitions.
(11) I think the government has no business legislating morality and think the government should respect individual privacy.
(12) I absolutely detest government subsidies and bailouts of all kinds, especially the kinds that lead to new stadiums and concessions for professional sports clubs and their owners.
(13) I support free trade as long as it is fair trade, with fair trade being defined as trade which creates jobs that ensure living wages, which protects the environment, which strengthens labor protections and workplace safety, and which diminishes income inequality.
(14) I think Fidel Castro is a dictator and that Cuba is a repressive state. But I think Chavez, while tending towards expressing an inflated sense of self-importance that borders on megalomania, is essentially a legitimate democratic leader and whose government generally respects the basic freedoms of its citizens, including the freedom to criticize and dissent from the government. I feel the same way about Evo Morales in Bolivia.
(15) I think the Iraq war is a fiasco, that it should have never been waged in the first place, and that it ended up being a cynical exercise in privileging and enriching private defense contractors and subcontractors and big oil.
(16) I am a pretty ardent supporter of Israel, but I recognize that the Palestinian people have rightful claims that cannot be dismissed out of hand.
(17) I believe in stricter gun control measures. And I see absolutely no logical reason for certain types of weapons to ever be legal for citizens to purchase. Among those I would include automatic assault weapons. So, I support an automatic assault weapons ban.
(18) I think affirmative action policies were absolutely just and necessary when they were initiated, but I do think they are becoming increasingly irrelevant and unnecessary.
(19) I don't expect to ever benefit from Social Security; but I do not think that the system should be privatized. I support this and other social safety net programs administered by the government as a matter of justice.
(20) I support free markets, but I do not embrace the notion that markets always and everywhere produce optimal outcomes that benefit all. I believe that the government has not only the right, but even the obligation, as a matter of social justice, to maintain social safety net entitlement programs for those who are disadvantaged and penalized, through no fault of their own, by the free market model.

Well, that's enough to go off of for now. Use this and chime in your thoughts about where you would locate me on the ideological spectrum in the comments section.

Update on JHS Posting

Last Sunday, I put up a posting about a "mock funeral" supposedly being planned or promoted by Jesuit High School students.

My post came on the heels of what was a very emotional national election after a long, contentious, and sometimes vicious and uncivil political campaign. Because of this, and being caught up in this emotionally tumultuous moment, I perhaps was a bit precipitous in putting up this posting. Upon reflection, I regret having done so -- not because I think an event of the sort doesn't merit some exposure or that JHS and its students merit special exemption from public criticism, but really because I should have taken more time to investigate and find out more details about the incident. I heard something about a "mock funeral" in a passing conversation and, in the passion of the moment, just launched a posting off of that.

Since that time, I have learned more details about the incident and it is not what I made it out to seem. Apparently, it was just one of those passing, silly inside jokes that high school students do. There were no serious plans being laid and nothing sinister at all intended. And, frankly, I remember being a high school student and can well imagine all the foolish pranksterism that I more than likely engaged in, too.

In the end, I let my emotions get in front of my better judgment. No good journalist (and I've never claimed to be one!) would have ever put up a posting like I did without looking into the matter further. In fact, I am as guilty of sophomoric behavior in this regard as I chide the students of being; and I've got plenty more years on them and should know much better, too.

As an alum of JHS, I am proud of the school and value all the good that it offers its students. I should have done better by it. And Jesuit students are still, by and large, consummately honorable, good, and responsible young men. I should have done better by them.

Catholicism at the Tipping Point

As most people have probably heard by now, some 54% of Catholics voted for Obama. And many of us have very solid "pro-life" reasons for doing so. But the Catholic hierarchy and the reactionaries among them envision being "pro-life" in a narrow and singular fashion: "anti-abortion." Do they not realize that more innocent, already-born children die of malnutrition and preventable diseases that come with poverty? Do they not know that more innocent already-born children die of the secondary consequences of warfare? Where is the consistency and urgency in protecting these lives? Where is the outrage and the threats of eternal condemnation for those Catholics who vote for candidates who perpetuate unjust warfare, who support capital punishment, who embrace torture?

Sheesh! I've just about had enough of these self-righteous moralizers who circle the wagons around pedophile priests and who turn a blind eye towards the Church's social justice teachings.

Crap like this and this is enough to make me want to simply leave the Church. Feh!

The Wardrobe to Nowhere

It is just incredible that Sarah Palin feigns wonder at why her $150,000 plus wardrobe became such a hot-button item late in the Presidential campaign:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says she was puzzled by the amount of attention her wardrobe got at the end of her unsuccessful vice presidential run.

In an interview that aired on Fox News Channel on Monday, Palin said she neither wanted nor asked for the $150,000-plus wardrobe the Republican Party bankrolled.

"I did not order the clothes. Did not ask for the clothes," Palin said. "I would have been happy to have worn my own clothes from Day One. But that is kind of an odd issue, an odd campaign issue as things were wrapping up there as to who ordered what and who demanded what."

Seems we've heard this line of argument before. The last time the issue of profligate spending connected to someone or something from Alaska surfaced, it had to do with some outrageous "bridge to nowhere." And just like then, Sarah Palin, Maverick reformer that she is, said "NO" to that bridge to nowhere. Except that she didn't. And even after public outcry over that infamous earmark forced her to back off the project and claim she never really wanted it in the first place and that it wasn't her doing, she still kept the money.

Just like that wardrobe. She says she didn't order the clothes and she didn't ask for the clothes. Maybe that's true. But she sure as heck didn't say "NO" to them! She sure as heck didn't worry about the expense of them! And she sure didn't voice any concerns about it until it was brought out into the light of day -- until that particular "earmark" came out of the shadows. She goes around saying that the most she ever asked for now and then was a Diet Dr. Pepper. But she gobbled up every perq, benefit, and piece of campaign pork that was thrown at her without so much as a blink. Of course, we all know that Sarah Palin is not one to blink at things and likes to "plow through" open doors -- even if it comes across as a gross excess of feeding at the trough of others. If this woman is the future of the GOP, God help the GOP.

Jan. 20 Funeral for America???

[UPDATE: Sunday, November 16, 2008: 8:35AM: Please see my more recent updated posting on the subject.]

A symbolic funeral for America on Jan. 20, the day when Barack Obama becomes officially the 44th President of the United States? Sounds like something Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh might conjure up, doesn't it? But, wait ...

I heard that such mock funeral plans are being laid locally by some very unlikely folks: students at Jesuit High School.

WTF?!?!?!

Now, I am an alum of JHS and I have to say I was shocked to hear this. The JHS of today, at least from what I can tell, is a radically different place as far as politics and ideology than when I was there. In a recent version of the school newspaper, The Blue Jay [which is regrettabley unavailable online], the senior class was polled on their preferences in the Presidential election, and more than 70% of those polled chose McCain/Palin over Obama/Biden.

Listen, I'm all for free speech and for students making whatever kinds of protest plans that they want; but planning a mock funeral for America when Obama is inaugurated? That's just too much. If this ever comes to pass, I promise that I'll personally stage my own little protest at the High School and hold up my own little protest sign on the corner of Carrollton and Banks. And I hope the local press sees fit to cover what would be an embarrassing display of anti-Patriotic "free speech" at the school.

Because I was disturbed by this news, I have thought a good bit about this over the past 24 hours. And my ponderings have left me to conclude two things about this: (1) These students must be shaped by a home environment that is extremely hostile to Obama and which sees politics through the lenses of ideological polarization, which leads to (2): the divisiveness of our politics over the past 16 years that I think has poisoned the well of a unified country.

All the more reason to be grateful that Obama is in the White House. God knows that our country needs desperately to escape the Dick Morris/Karl Rove, Clinton/Bush poles of poisonous politics. And I hope some folks with authority at JHS can talk some sense into the sophomoric behavior of these foolish kids.

Precinct Performance Updates

On election day, this past Tuesday, I gave some data on two Louisiana voting precints: Ward 14 / Precinct 13A, which represented the Tulane University campus resident student crowd; and Ward 14 / Precinct 25, which was my voting precinct. I thought it might be of interest to show you how these precincts turned out.

Ward 14 / Precinct 13A
Registered Voters: 2,889
Total Votes Cast: 1,238
% Turnout: 42.85%
Votes for Obama/Biden (% of votes cast): 931 (75.20%)
Votes for McCain/Palin (% of votes cast): 279 (22.54%)
Votes for others (% of votes cast): 28 (2.26%)

Ward 14 / Precinct 25
Registered Voters: 545
Total Votes Cast: 279
% Turnout: 51.19%
Votes for Obama/Biden (% of votes cast): 217 (77.78%)
Votes for McCain/Palin (% of votes cast): 60 (21.51%)
Votes for others (% of votes cast): 2 (.71%)

How do these precincts compare to Orleans Parish and Louisana State averages? Here's the comparative data:

Orleans Parish
Registered Voters: 278,759**
Total Votes Cast: 146,287
% Turnout: 52.48%
Votes for Obama/Biden (% of votes cast): 116,042 (79.32%)
Votes for McCain/Palin (% of votes cast): 28,041 (19.17%)
Votes of others (% of votes cast): 2,204 (1.51%)

State of Louisiana
Registered Voters: 2,908,342**
Total Votes Cast: 1,959,085
% Turnout: 67.36%
Votes for Obama/Biden (% of votes cast): 781,574 (39.89%)
Votes for McCain/Palin (% of votes cast): 1,148,015 (58.60%)
Votes for others (% of votes cast): 29,496 (1.51%)

**These numbers come from voter registration data in the Louisiana Secretary of State's Office as of 10/17/08. This means that the actual number of registered voters as of election day (11/4/08) was likely somewhat higher, which would make the turnout percentages statewide and in Orleans parish a bit lower; and this would be consistent with the statewide reported turnout rate of about 66%.

Thought of the Day

The difference between conservatives and liberals following an electoral defeat can be summed up accordingly: Liberals brood and make empty threats to leave the country; Conservatives brood and stock up on guns and munitions.

What To Do About LA Congressional District 2

A while back on my blog, when I posted my election recommendations, I hinted at a surprise, party-discipline-breaking pick by The Huck Upchuck for Congressional District 2 -- even if Helena Moreno might have won.

I thought I was going to be pushing the envelope among the progressive NOLA Blogosphere in revealing my choice, but Oyster beat me to the punch! Dang! The early bird catches the worm!

Oyster came out and endorsed GOP candidate Anh "Joseph" Cao. He pointed to Cao's impressive biography as part of the reason to like him. And that's true. I agree with Oyster on this point. But, even still, that's not reason enough for me. I generally take these campaign website biographies with a grain of salt because they always put the best face forward, embellished for effect, on these things. And so, while I was impressed, I was also not fully convinced. Until I had the chance to test Cao directly. Let me elaborate ...

Recently, I was part of organizing a Candidate forum for Congressional District 2. This forum took place on Tuesday, October 28. The focus was on issues of importance to the Latino community. I moderated this forum on behalf of the collaborating organizations who put the event together: Tulane University's Stone Center for Latin American Studies, Puentes New Orleans, and the Louisiana Association of Nonprofit Organizations. Four of the six candidates showed up: Helena Moreno, one of the two remaining Democrats in the race; Anh "Joseph" Cao, the Republican candidate; Jerry Jacobs, an independent; and Gregory Kahn, the Libertarian candidate. William Jefferson, the current incumbent Democratic candidate, did not participate. He simply ignored our repeated invitations. And Malik Rahim, the Green Party candidate, was fighting off an illness.

There's a lot to say about this event; but I won't say too much. The only point I want to make here is that Joseph Cao did exceedingly well as far as I was concerned. The questions posed to the candidates at the forum dealt with immigration reform, language access, health care, housing, and education. As an immigrant himself for whom English was, and is, a second language, Joseph Cao's answers to just about all of the questions posed were extremely progressive -- I thought even more progressive than Helena Moreno's answers. Cao supports comprehensive immigration reform and he does not think a security first policy is appropriate as a rational and feasible and even humane approach to the issue; he supports the DREAM act that would allow undocumented children of immigrants the rights to temporary (and perhaps permanent) legal status; he supports legislative initiatives that would provide access to information and documents in the native languages of non-english speaking peoples; as a lawyer himself, he has an impressive knowledge of federal immigration and citizenship laws; he supports bi-lingual education and was personally instrumental in establishing a language immersion public charter school in New Orleans east in the Vietnamese and Spanish languages; and he projected a commitment to the principles of social justice in ways that one would simply not expect of a Republican. Of course, Cao holds positions that I disagree with, but he was certainly not dogmatic and ideologically rigid in his demeanor and in his stances. He, frankly, struck me as sincere, honest, and very open to many different viewpoints. At a very fundamental level of character and temperament, he came across to me as the conservative version of Barack Obama.

Because I look very closely at candidate positions that affect the Latino and other immigrant communities, Cao's positions impressed me. And his partisan identification just doesn't worry me. I think he will be a fair and good representative of the diversity of New Orleans, I think he will be honest and responsible with the public trust, and I just don't think he will let the lure of the power of politics change what I think is his fundamental humility as a public servant.

So, hold your hats, folks, given the choices we have before us this election cycle, The Huck Upchuck is breaking with party discipline and is not only endorsing the Republican Party candidate,

Anh "Joseph" Cao,

for Congress, but is doing so unreservedly and enthusiastically.

[UPDATE: Apparently something is wrong with Cao's website. Hopefully that will be fixed soon. But the "url" in the links above was correct.]

[UPDATE 2: I just spoke with Mr. Cao and he informed me that he has a new website - http://josephcaoforcongress.com/. I've updated the links above accordingly.]

[UPDATE 3: It goes without saying that my endorsement is strictly my own personal endorsement. It does not reflect the preferences of any other individual associated with the October 28 Candidate Forum, nor does it reflect any official endorsement by any of the organizations that co-sponsored the Candidate Forum.]

The Warrantless Blogtapping Program

BLOG UNDER SURVEILLANCE: Right Wing News
Issue: John Hawkins' Schizophrenia on Race

I appreciate conservative blogger John Hawkins' gracious congratulatory posting regarding Barack Obama's victory. It must have been a bit painful for him to write, so I give him credit for doing so. However ...

I can't simply let slide what I still see as a conservative myopia and schizophrenia, if not hypocrisy, regarding the subject of race in America. Here's the relevant part of what Hawkins wrote in his posting linked above:

Although I would have certainly preferred to have John McCain in the White House, it will at least be nice to finally see a black American become President. Conservatives have been saying America isn't a racist nation for a long time. This proves we're right. Conservatives have been saying that we don't need Affirmative Action in this country. This proves we're right.

And yet, in his very next posting, Hawkins had this to say about race:

In other words, despite the staggering advantages the Democrats had in this election, including a candidate who undoubtedly drew in millions of black voters who wanted to pull the lever for the first black President and millions of other voters gripped by white guilt, it only led to a shift of about 4% of the American public from the Republicans to the Democrats.

I've written about this before. And it just keeps surfacing. Doesn't Hawkins see the contradictions in his positions? On the one hand, he keeps propagating this notion that America is not a racist nation, while on the other hand explaining Barack Obama's success and victory to racist behavior. Does Hawkins not see that he takes pride in finally being able to "see a black American become President" without noting the irony that it wasn't his vote that helped make this happen? What should one make of that? Doesn't Hawkins recognize that, if it's Barack Obama's election to the White House which is the evidence that we are not a racist country, it stands to reason that the folks who actually voted for him and put him there are the ones that represent the actual proof of this claim? Doesn't he see the irony that when he claims Barack Obama's election as "proof" that conservatives were right that America is not racist, he is essentially saying that this proof is not being provided by conservative who voted against Obama, but rather by those who actually voted in a way that made this happen?

I can't tell you how many times I've left comments at Hawkins' blog defending and supporting Obama without once mentioning (or even thinking about, for that matter) the color of Obama's skin, only to have been accused of being racist simply for supporting Obama. For some conservatives, it is inconceivable that a white person would vote for Obama for any reason other than his skin color. They are fond of calling this "white guilt," and then they have the gall to say that I'm the one stuck on the slavery and Jim Crow past of America because I support the "black" guy! Whatever. Suffice it to say that my experiences on Right Wing News comment boards illustrates this conservative schizophrenia regarding race in America perfectly. ...

You know, I had a kind of epiphany last night when looking at the crowds and the environments surrounding both McCain and Obama's speeches at the end of the evening. Unlike what Sarah Palin claimed on the campaign trail, the "real" America, in all of our wonderful diversity, was on display in Chicago. And just a small, narrow, and fundamentally non-diverse slice of America was on display in Arizona. It was the same at the Conventions. For good or bad, that's just the way it is. But for Republicans, if they don't find a way to harness the growing diversity of America and make some kind of intellectual argument framing this diversity in the context of a principled conservatism, more and more states are likely to be turning blue in future years. Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada -- they're not flukes, but rather a sign of a growing diversity in the context of our national unity. And John Hawkins, for all his sincere effort really to embrace and be part of this diversity in his recognition of the importance of an Obama victory in this regard, is still caught up in the contradictions of a context where race is a recognized, important, and significant aspect of identity, but where this difference is celebrated and not seen as a matter of divisiveness. Hawkins just can't seem to get beyond his "black and white" understanding of race in America. By this I mean that Hawkins can't envision an America that sees and embraces race (and other identity markers, for that matter) as meaningful, but which also doesn't necessarily see discrimination in this. For Hawkins, being "color-blind" means denying race at all levels of social meaning. And yet he himself simply cannot take his own advice and get beyond seeing the meaning in race. So, he's left holding to that schizophrenic practice of being a rhetorically "color-blind" conservative who is never actually "blind" to color and who, instead, always sees something insidious in ascribing meaning to race all the while he does precisely that.

Right Wing News = Wrong Wing Nut

Way, way back in June of 2006 I posed a question to conservative blogger John Hawkins of Right Wing News, which he answered on his blog. Here's the post which contains my question and Hawkins' answer:

Q&A Friday #43: Will Obama Be The First African American President?

Question: "And do you think Obama will be this country's first African American president?" -- huckupchuck

Answer: I'm of the opinion that the first black President is likely to be a conservative Republican who pulls in a big chunk of the black vote without turning off the rest of the country by being in favor of Affirmative Action, reparations, racial set-asides, and all the other noxious black policies Democratic pols seem to feel obligated to support.

I wonder how Hawkins is feeling today about being so wrong back then.

And As It Ends, So It Begins

President-elect Barack Obama.

Powerful, profound moment.

I am so grateful to be alive and to have had the chance to participate in this moment.

I am also so full of emotion right now that I can hardly think.

When the dust settles, we all of us end up in our own little corners of our world, our homes, feeling a bit small and insignificant in the end, carving out a silent space to absorb the full impact and meaning of it all.

It is almost too much to bear.

God bless this great country of ours.

Louisiana Ward 14 / Precinct 25 Stats

This is my Ward/Precinct. Some data:

Total Registered Voters as of 11/2/08: 545

Breakdown by race:
White: 231
Black: 279
Other: 35

Breakdown by Party:
Democrat: 340
Republican: 89
Other/Independent: 116

Number of Registered voters who had already voted by the time I got there at 8:15am: 89

Percent of Registered voters who had already cast a ballot as of 8:15am: 16.33%

This doesn't include the number of early voters.

What this means for the election:

McCain = Toast; Obama = President

Louisiana For Obama! Yes, We Can!

Louisiana Ward 14, Precinct 13 A - 2:15PM Update

This Ward and Precinct is the one located in the University Center on Tulane's campus. Here's the Ward/Precinct Marker:


















Some data on this Ward/Precinct from the Louisiana Secretary of State's Office:

Total Registered Voters as of 11/2/08: 2,889
Total Democrats Registered as of 11/2/08: 1,272
Total Republicans Registered as of 11/2/08: 470
Total "Other/Independents" Registered as of 11/2/08: 1,147

What the lines looked like at 2:15PM, some 4 hours after my first photo:


















What this means for the election:

McCain = Toast; Obama = President

Tulane Students Rise To the Occasion

As a native New Orleanean and a professor at Tulane University who teaches on civic engagement and politics, as well as Latin American Studies, I've been observing Tulane student attitudes towards civic life for the past 7 years. So I think I have a pretty good read on where students are with regard to voting attitudes and behavior. In general, Tulane students, who are generally affluent, have been mostly apathetic (except for my students, of course!); but this year is markedly different. Example: I am also a DJ for the University Radio station (WTUL 91.5 FM) and I do a classical music show from 6:00am-8:00am on Tuesday mornings. When I showed up on campus for my radio show this morning at about 5:30am, I noticed a line of students already forming outside of the University Center, which is the campus student union, where three voting machines were set up and ready to open at 6am. By the time I left my radio show at a little after 8:00am to head to my office for work, the line was still long. I went home to vote [see previous posting] and returned to my office at the University shortly thereafter. At 9:30am, I had a scheduled meeting with a student who told me that he had just come from voting and had to wait in line for about an hour. I was just incredulous. So, I went over the University Center again right after our meeting was over (about 10:00am), this time with my camera in hand, and found the line still stretching down McAlister Drive. (Photo below) It was about 50 people deep, nearly all students, and all in great spirits. I'm attaching a photo of this line. Inside the building, there was another line of about 20 voters, one of whom included one of my students from my 11:00am class! If I had to guess, about 95% Obama supporters. I would have asked the precinct volunteers what was the current tally on the total number of voters since the polls opened at 6:00am, but they looked much too harried to be bothered, so I left well-enough alone. I'm telling you, something unprecedented is happening. I can't wait for the Louisiana shocker that sends the Pelican State's 9 electoral votes to Barack Obama!

The Hucks Send Obama to the White House

The Hucks went together down to the voting station in our neighborhood's local public elementary school right after I got home from my radio show at about 8:15am or so. There are about 7 or 8 precincts set up in the school's cafeteria. The lines were larger than I had ever seen before, except for my precinct, which is among the smaller in the city. My wife and I were able to vote right away. And we each took one of our daughters in the voting booths with us. We proudly cast our votes for Obama. And then I asked someone to take our family picture in front of our voting booth after the deed was done. (See below) Cheesy, I know. But I just had to mark this moment with my family in some way. I know that memories for youngsters fade over time, and I want my daughters to know that they were there and were active participants when history was made.

VOTE

OBAMA



YES, WE CAN!

Anatomy of Rightwing Schizophrenia

John McCain's campaign has been accused of being erratic, disorganized, and dysfunctional. And it has been. It is probably one of the worst campaigns the GOP has run for the Presidency in about 35 years. Indicative of the campaign is the attitude of the Rightwing base. They have also been all over the place, disorganized, and dysfunctional. They have swung like John Kerry's 2004 flip-flops from moments of disgust with McCain, to moments of embracing McCain, to moments of resigned fatalism. Let me show you an example of what I think has been typical of the schizophrenic Rightwing base.

John Hawkins is a conservative blogger who has a pretty popular site called Right Wing News. I have been following this blog for many years now and I can say with a fair degree of confidence that I understand John Hawkins fairly well. Hawkins is also a regular columnist for Townhall.com. Over this past election cycle, Hawkins has been as erratic about McCain as McCain has been as a candidate.

On February 1, 2008, when it looked like McCain might just sneak out the GOP nomination, Hawkins wrote a Townhall column entitled: "Why You're Going To Vote For John McCain In November And Like It!" Granted, Hawkins was being a bit facetious with this title and really showed very little love for McCain in this piece, but his point was that Republicans should hold their nose and vote for McCain as the least bad of the options. He reiterated this position in a follow-up posting on his blog later that same day. And so Hawkins called Republicans to be good party militants, even in spite of all of McCain's recognized minuses as a potential candidate.

Then, not some four months later, on May 23, Hawkins wrote a post on his blog called: Why I Will No Longer Support John McCain For President. In this posting, Hawkins wrote:

Put very simply: John McCain is a liar. He's a man without honor, without integrity, who could not have captured the Republican nomination had he run on making comprehensive immigration a top priority of his administration. Quite frankly, this is little different from George Bush, Sr. breaking his "Read my lips, no new taxes pledge," except that Bush's father was at least smart enough to wait until he got elected before letting all of his supporters know that he was lying to them.

Under these circumstances, I simply cannot continue to support a man like John McCain for the presidency. Since that is the case, I have already written the campaign and asked them to take me off of their mailing list and to no longer send me invitations to their teleconferences. I see no point in asking questions to a man who has no compunction about lying through his teeth on one of the most crucial election issues and then changing his position the first time he believes he can get away with it.

Moreover, I genuinely regret having to do this because I do still believe the country would be better off with John McCain as President as opposed to Obama or Clinton. However, I just cannot in good conscience cast a vote for a man who has told this big of a lie, for this long, about this important of an issue.

That being said, although I cannot back John McCain, encourage others to vote for him, or contribute any more money to his campaign, I'm not going to tell you that you should do that same thing. What McCain has done here is a bridge too far for me, but others may not have as big a problem with being told this sort of lie. That's their decision.

Furthermore, I will defend John McCain when I think he deserves to be defended, excoriate Barack Obama and/or Hillary Clinton at every opportunity, and I will continue to stand behind the sort of Republican candidates who actually deserve conservative support. But, what I will not do is vote for John McCain in November.

In a follow-up posting later that same day Hawkins explained himself further:

But personally, I think that there has got to be some kind of line in the sand that these politicians cannot be allowed to cross. In McCain's case, he lied about the single most important issue in determining many people's votes, is the Republican Party's nominee only because he told that lie, and now he has publicly shifted positions in a way that reveals he was lying the whole time -- and he did so before the election. Here's a man who has so little respect for conservatives that he doesn't even feel compelled to wait until he's elected to reveal that he wasn't telling them the truth about an issue they care desperately about.

If we're willing to put up with that, is there any line that he can't cross and get away with it? If McCain shifts on a dime tomorrow and says that he's only going to appoint pro-Roe Supreme Court justices, are conservatives just going to say, "Well, I'm not happy but he's still better than Obama." If he decides that the war is too much of a liability for him in the polls and he's just going to pull out like Obama and watch the country collapse into genocide, would that be Ok, too? If those things were to happen, I'd hope the answer would be, "No, that isn't OK with us."

It would be one thing if McCain ran on these issues and won the nomination anyway. At least then, you could say, "I'm not happy, but we have nobody to blame but ourselves because we knew exactly what we were getting." But, when the man doesn't even have enough respect for conservatives to follow through for a few months on one of the key promises he made to get the nomination, what message does it send to other Republicans? How far are they going to go if McCain doesn't pay a price for egregiously lying on an issue that is this important?

That's why, despite the fact that I think having McCain in the White House would be preferable to having Obama or Clinton in there, I cannot support his candidacy. Sometimes, the price you have to pay to keep your side in power is just a little too high.

Yet almost four months later, Hawkins reverted back to his original position. In a September 8, 2008, post entitled: "Why I Am Now Supporting John McCain," Hawkins wrote:

As RWN's regular readers already know, I have been a harsh critic of John McCain for a long time and back in May, I wrote a post called, "Why I Will No Longer Support John McCain For President." That post was widely linked and was probably why I was blackballed from the Republican National Convention.

However, I've been wavering on my "non-vote" in the 2008 election for a while. That's not because I've warmed up to McCain; it's because of my concerns about Barack Obama.

...

Despite the fact that I have a lot of differences with John McCain, I am going vote for him and I would encourage you to do the same. Whatever else you may say about the man, he is capable of handling the presidency and his election will teach the Left more about common decency than any mere words ever could.

And now, when he's not trashing George Will for writing a much milder critism of McCain than Hawkins had done months before, Hawkins is going around telling others why they should vote for McCain, too.

[ASIDE: How's this for some rich irony? Hawkins writes in this nasty little rant against George Will:

I'm sick and tired of these prissy jackasses and Beltway bubbleheads who put a higher priority on getting on the Colbert Report or MSNBC than winning the election.

How did we end up with all these primadonnas and divas in the Republican Party who are looking to get a few extra minutes in the spotlight at the expense of the country and everyone else in the conservative movement?

You're not happy with McCain, Bush, and the Republican Party? Well, join the party, pal. Do you think the last few years have been fun for the rest of us? If you can't act like a professional and suck it up until the election, then you're either in the wrong profession or the wrong party.

Either way, I'm not going to tell you to shut up, but I will tell you publicly that you can kiss my *ss.

Ahem! I wonder if, upon reflection, Hawkins thinks ruefully of himself as a "prissy jackass" for issuing a declaration of his intention not to vote for McCain back in May?]

Anyway, with regard to directing others to vote for McCain, Hawkins suggested in a Townhall column published on October 31, 2008, some Thirty Reasons To Vote For John McCain and even shared his own voting experience with his readers on the same day in a posting entitled: "I Voted Today..." At the end of this post, Hawkins wrote:

PS: Yes, I voted for Palin and McCain and I hope you do, too.

It's no wonder the McCain campaign is schizophrenic, bitter, and dysfunctional. Just look at the state of base conservatives these days as reflected in the anger, dysfunction, and contradictions of John Hawkins and you'll understand why.

Conundrum for Christianists: Jesus on Halloween

This story, about a middle-school boy sent home from school for dressing up as Jesus for Halloween, was priceless. Why priceless? Because of the conundrum it poses for Christianists.

Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you're probably aware that Christianists have been gnashing their teeth, rending their garments, and lamenting to high heaven the intolerance of school officials towards personal displays of Christianity at public schools. From wearing a cross necklace to invoking the Christian God in commencement addresses, Christians have complained about the persecution of Christian students at public schools by efforts on the part of school administrators to protect the separation of church and state. So, here we have a young boy dressing up as Christ and heading off to school. And what happens? He gets sent home because his outfit was deemed "offensive." But here's the question: Offensive in what way? Was it offensive to church-state separation advocates because it brought Christian symbolism into the school? Or was it offensive to Christians because it was a Halloween costume and mixed Jesus in with all the other ghouls, witches, clowns, and pirates?

I tend to agree with Oyster, to whom I owe a hat tip for pointing me to the story, that this kid should be able to dress in whatever costume he wants to as long as he's not violating public nudity laws (i.e. tarzan costumes and/or speedo swimsuits) or advocating messages of violence or hate (i.e. KKK hoods or NAZI swastika uniforms). In this case, he was well clad and wasn't advocating any hateful messages. So, I say, especially on a day when costumes are encouraged, that he should have been left alone. But I'm very curious to hear whether Christianists who think that dressing up as Jesus on Halloween is blasphemous and offensive would agree. Let's see how many of these god-fearing, righteous folks, who complain about unfairly persecuting Christians for displaying symbols of Christianity in public schools, come to this boy's defense. One would hope so, if these folks really do believe in protecting religious speech in public schools; but I'm not holding my breath.

Whither the Progressive NOLABlogosphere on Obama

Oyster at Your Right Hand Thief has a post up today which explains the lack of visible Obamaphilia on his blog. I have to say that I had, indeed, noticed this lack. But I understand his reasoning completely.

I haven't been so reticent, especially during the primary season, in expressing my support for Obama; but over the past month or so, my Obamaphilia has also been a bit more restrained. My focus, like Oyster's, has been moreso in harping on criticisms of Obama's Republican rivals.

Like, Oyster, I also have some posts up in the draft queue on The Huck Upchuck that I have been just too gunshy to put up until after Tuesday.

I have noticed this cautious and guarded optimism on most of the progressive, pro-Obama blogs that I visit regularly these days. I think we liberals are all quite chastened by the past eight years of wandering in the wilderness and are very much aware of the disappointments that can come crashing down upon us at the very bitter end.

But I will say this, win or lose, the Obama campaign has been absolutely stellar from start to finish. If Obama loses, I think it will be due to the electorate's unreadiness for a man like Obama in the White House -- and I'd say unreadiness because of Obama's age and, yes, his race -- both of which are beyond his control and which he has been masterful in managing to the extent that this is possible.

I am and will be unambiguously proud of Obama and his campaign and will keep my head high come Wednesday morning, regardless of the outcome.

Dia de los Muertos

Day of the Dead in downtown New Orleans. Right outside the famed Cabildo, next to St. Louis Cathedral in Jackson Square in the French Quarter of New Orleans, a brave Tulane student dances with the Mariachi as part of the day's Dia de los Muertos festivities. In addition to Mariachi music, there is a fabulous Day of the Dead altar on display on the 2nd floor of the Cabildo. You can see the display tomorrow from 2-4pm -- and then get some Cafe du Monde beignets and cafe-au-lait afterwards. Here's a shot of the altar at the Cabildo:




















The weather is absolutely glorious in the Big Easy these days. Get out to the "Quarters" and check it out!

Barack O'Bama Is Irish

Recommended by my sweet, 10-yr-old, Obama-supporting FIG (Freckly Irish Girl):



My favorite verse (starting at the 3:24 mark):

Now, you Hillary supporters, don't you vote for McCain,
And a VP needs brains, so forget about Palin.
With Cheney and Bush, they are all ignorama.
There's no one as Irish as Barack O'Bama!

The Huckupchuck's Electoral Endorsements

President: The clear choice for The Huckupchuck is the Obama/Biden ticket. In my mind, there is just no comparison about what is in the best interests of our country and U.S. citizens not only as it relates to domestic policy, but also as it relates to our reputation abroad. I just came back from a lecture with the Honduran Minister of Culture who pointed out that 76% of Latin Americans are more reassured by the prospect of an Obama presidency than a McCain presidency, even though many Latin American policymakers think that McCain probably knows more about the region than Obama. But my enthusiastic, unreserved, and unconditional support for Obama/Biden is no surprise. As for local races, here are some of my thoughts:

U.S. Senate: John Kennedy not only is a turncoat; he's not even a convincing turncoat. His whole campaign has been one big dud. I mean, he can't even do the conservative fear/smearmongering all that well. There is a reason why Landrieu is no longer even close to being a GOP pickup opportunity. And it's because Kennedy is such a horrible candidate. Frankly, I don't even know what Kennedy's true positions on the issues are. With Landrieu, though I sometimes don't like what I get from her, I can't say that I'm ever surprised by her. She's pretty clear on where she stands on issues. And I can at least live with that. So, The Huckupchuck gives a clear, unequivocal, though not fully enthusiastic endorsement for Landrieu in the U.S. Senate race.

Orleans Parish District Attorney: I have serious reservations about both candidates; but I tend to lean towards Cannizzaro over Capitelli. I have to say that it bothers me to no end that I almost without fail see yard signs for both of these guys next to yard signs for McCain/Palin in front of pretty big uptown mansions. And although, as Mrs. Huckupchuck often tells me, party identification in local races is much less relevant than the national races, it still disturbs me that folks who embrace a clear conservative ideology (and make no bones about expressing such preferences) also seem to feel pretty comfortable embracing either of the two DA candidates who claim to be Democrats. But I guess we need to have one of them. And though I supported Jason Williams in the primaries, and though Williams has endorsed Capitelli, I have had some direct, positive experiences with Cannizzaro that pulls me towards him as the lesser of two candidates neither of whom I consider ideal.

Louisiana Congressional District 1: For the first time in a loooooong time, Congressional District 1 has a real shot at a Democrat. From what I have seen from the Harlan campaign, he is about as good a Democrat as Congressional District 1 is ever likely to get. Of course, I'm not so keen on his social conservatism; but being a social conservative is simply a sine-qua-non for that district. And Harlan's social conservatism is not the angry kind. As for Scalise, he's just pure conservative Christianist Republicanism. Anyone would be better than Scalise (except, perhaps, for Tim Burns). And Harlan is not just an alternative; but the most acceptable alternative. So, The Huckupchuck gives a clear endorsement to Jim Harlan.

Louisiana Congressional District 2 (Democratic Party Second Primary Election): My district. A reliably Democratic district. And this year, the Democratic candidate choices in this Second Primary Runoff election (Helena Moreno and William Jefferson) are not only just weak, but also mostly unacceptable. I cannot and will not, as a matter of principle and conscience, endorse or vote for William Jefferson. True that he is technically innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; but I've been convinced in the court of my own opinion long ago that he's guilty, if not of criminal behavior under the law (which I think he is, anyway), then of being among the worst of the corrupt cynics in Congress. So, that leaves me giving my reluctant endorsement to Helena Moreno in this primary. As much as I think Helena Moreno is a Republican disingenuously wrapped in the clothing of a Democrat just for the sake of being elected in a Democratic district, she at least appears to be ethically above reproach. The general election is another thing altogether. And, regardless of who wins the Democratic Party nomination, I have to admit that I'm considering breaking party discipline and seriously looking at the other candidates. I'll have more to say about this after Nov. 4; and I think you might be quite surprised to hear what it is I have to say.

As for the rest of the races, I have nothing to say nor any endorsements to make.

The Wisdom of Our Elders

Two octogenarian women, and life-long friends, start to blogging and the result is ... well ... you just have to read it to believe it. Here's a sample:

I cannot believe this is even close. How did America get so far off track that a week out from this election many still think it is too close to call?

It was either a few years ago or a few months ago… at my age it all blends together. But I remember it was all over the news and on the cover of all the magazines. One of those new ”starlets”… Paris or Brittney or Lindsey or Chutney or something like that - one of those starlets got caught getting out of a car without her under garments. That’s right. Photographers all around and her hoo-ha was out there for everyone and God to see because she forgot to put on a pair of panties.

I know you all know what I am talking about. It was all over the news. Scandalous they said. Out of control. She needs help. What is the world coming to? EVERYONE was shocked and EVERYONE was talking about it. How could she? What kind of a role model is she for young girls? I know you all remember it. If my scattered brain can remember it, I know you can. People didn’t have to be told how the cow ate the cabbage on that one. We all knew it instinctively.

Well imagine my shock and surprise today when I came across this little item. The latest polls show that only 55% of Americans think that Sarah Palin is not qualified to be President. 55%! FIFTY FIVE PERCENT! This about the woman whose best qualification for the job to date is that she can see Russia from her house. So what exactly does Sarah Palin have to do before the other 45% of this country is shocked enough to realize that she is a “whack job”? Please Lord don’t tell me she has to show her hoo-ha in public.

If, in fact, you are reading this blog and think that Sarah Palin is actually qualified to run the country… well I suggest you check and see if your panties are on because the joke just may be on you.

I worship the wisdom of our elders! You go girls!

[H/T: Andrew Sullivan]

Times-Picayune Endorses Obama

Here's what I think is the most relevant part of the endorsement:

But on balance, we believe that Sen. Obama's qualities as a leader equip him better to be the next president.

Running a campaign is similar to running an administration. It requires that the leader set the tone; that he manage a complex organization; that he chart a nimble course in the face of changing circumstances; that he choose subordinates judiciously; that he exercise good judgment under pressure. An effective campaign is the prelude to a well-run office.

Sen. Obama has acquitted himself superbly, masterminding a marathon run with focus, discipline and a knack for assembling a talented team. He communicates across lines of age, class and ethnicity. He listens and he learns. His ability to beat the Clintons, past masters of electoral politics, showed tough leadership and organizational qualities.

A president must navigate by an inner compass. Mr. Obama's steadiness and his ability to weather political storms bespeak self-confidence and a sureness of purpose. We are riding out a tempest, and he is, quite simply, even-keeled. He possesses expertise that should endear him to the New Orleans area.

I couldn't agree more. And I reiterate my completely anti-intuitive and exclusively gut-based, wishful-thinking prediction of a Louisiana shocker on November 4 with Louisiana's 9 electoral votes going to Obama at the end of the day.

The Bloom is Off the Rose

Times-Picayune columnist Chris Rose appears to be in a sad downward spiral. For some, this is not surprising. Rose has been seen around Lusher school lately, during times when kids are in transit, looking disheveled and raising eyebrows with beer bottle a cup of what looked like beer and cigarettes in hand. This is tragic. Such a talented writer succumbing to his demons.

LA Congressional District 2 Candidate Forum

The Stone Center for Latin American Studies at Tulane University, Puentes New Orleans, and the Louisiana Association of Nonprofit Organizations LAVotes Campaign are co-sponsoring a Candidate Forum for Louisiana's 2nd Congressional District on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 from 7:00-9:00pm at the Qatar Ballroom in the Lavin Bernick Center of Tulane University.

All six of the remaining candidates in this race were invited to this forum. Four of the six candidates have confirmed their participation: Helena Moreno (D), Joseph Cao (R), Jerry Jacobs (I), Gregory Kahn (L).

The forum will be a two-part moderated event. During the first part, a moderator from one of the sponsoring organizations will pose a series of questions (probably 5-6) to the candidates, each of whom will be allowed 3 minutes to respond. During the second part, select questions submitted by audience members to the moderator before the start of the event will be posed to the candidates. The forum will concentrate on issues of importance to the local Latino community. It is free and open to the public. Please plan to come to Tulane University this Tuesday and be a part of this event. And to the NOLAblogger community, bring your computers and live-blog the event!

If anyone has any questions about the event, just drop me an email or leave them in the comments section. I hope to see you at the Forum.

Palin the Well-Dressed: Let Them Eat Cake

Apparently, since McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate less than three months ago, the RNC has spent a whopping $150,000 just to keep Palin well-dressed and well-coiffed. Let me put this into some perspective for you. In less than three months, the amount that the RNC has spent on Sarah Palin's fashion accessorizing could almost buy my 2800 square foot house outright. As for me, I had to take out a 30 year mortgage. Also, over that same time frame, my household has spent probably in the range of $300 on clothing, shoes, makeup, and visits to the barber/hairstylist -- and I'm talking about 4 people combined, 3 of whom are fashionable females.

This is supposed to be the campaign/party that eschews "celebrity," embraces Joe Sixpack the Plumber, and claims to exercise some kind of fiscal restraint and responsibility? Puh-lease!

Question for Conservatives

To my conservative friends, relatives, and blog visitors, I have this nagging two part question that I would like for you to answer directly and honestly:

Part 1: Is Obama a terrorist?

Part 2: If not, is McCain trying to paint Obama as one?

They're simple "Yes/No" questions. So please, if you would, answer them accordingly. And after you do so, then you can add whatever qualifiers you want. I just want a clear, unobfuscated, simple, honest answer.

And, in exchange, I promise to answer honestly any simple "Yes/No" questions you migth want to pose to me.

Gutterball McCain

I've been thinking more on McCain's desperate attempts to smear/fear his way into the White House. And the more I think on this the more I imagine that my friends and relatives who are decent conservatives must be simply mortified and embarrassed by the McCain tactics. If you want a good take on the final coup de grace in this despicable gutterball campaign strategy, just read this and this.

They'll go into the voting booths and pull the lever for McCain for honorable reasons; but they'll be doing so in the full knowledge that McCain's victory, if he gets it, is wrapped up not in the honorable reasons, but in the dishonorable ones. And they'll have to live with themselves if that comes to pass. Feh!

Colin Powell Endorses Obama

Even though Powell's endorsement is not all that surprising, what one can't help but admire is the measured, rational, and humane explanation Powell gives for his decision. It is a reflection of all that is good and pure about America and what can be great, instead of base, about its politics. What Powell laments is the loss of principled and human decency in the politics of what has become the modern GOP.

Contrast Powell's words, which should impress anyone, liberal and conservative alike, with this comment by a rabid rightwing blogger who, in responding to a posting by The Atlantic's Ross Douthat, another sane and humane conservative blogger, who offered up a mild criticism of conservatives in their irrational defense of the unpreparedness of Sarah Palin for the Presidency, not to mention her despicable gutterball tactics, wrote:

I have found some of my fellow conservative bloggers to lack the degree of intellectual suppleness with which I might enjoy interacting more. But -- what's his [Ross Douthat's] tactical point? It's two weeks and goal. Does he want to send Sarah Palin out to Professor Henry Higgins? She isn't going to pick up that masters from the Woodrow Wilson School between now and Election Day, and it would hardly matter if she did, would it?

She needs to pick up rocks, mud and pointed sticks. And do her worst with 'em. Because, Ross, that's what we're down to. And I ain't spinning you no silk here.

Colin Powell wants a modicum of decency. And the rabid rightwing wants blood at all costs, even if it destroys respectable conservatism in the process.

Politics on the Sleeve

Lately, I've been wondering about something. Over the past three or four weeks, I've been wearing every now and then my Barack Obama T-Shirts or buttons. I've noticed that the only people in my town who seem to wear their politics on their sleeves, literally, are Obama supporters. I have seen a couple of McCain/Palin bumper stickers, but I haven't seen any McCain/Palin buttons or T-shirts around. So, I began to think ... is there something about Democrats that propels them to broadcast their political preferences in such public ways? Or do I feel comfortable doing this because I believe that I am in Obama-friendly territory? Or is it just a personality thing? The fact is that it gives me satisfaction and pride to project my political preferences during election time. It is, in fact, my little contribution to the Obama campaign. I don't feel anything untoward about it at all. Neither does my wife. Nor do my liberal friends. And even my conservative family and friends don't seem to be put out or bothered by it. Why aren't there any McCain/Palin advocates out there doing the same thing?

Now, New Orleans is, of course, a Democratic stronghold; but it is not exclusively so. After all, New Orleans is in Louisiana, which is a pretty conservative state for the most part. And liberal Democratic politics in New Orleans is a far cry from the the liberalism of the East and West Coasts. Furthermore, there are places I go in the suburbs, just 5-10 minutes down the road from where I live, that are about as conservative as they come. So it's not like I feel I am completely in Obama-friendly territory every where I go. Yet, even still, I don't think simply being in a conservative GOP stronghold would prevent me from wearing my Obama T-shirt. I've thought about it and I'm certain that I'd wear such political advertisements pretty much anywhere in the U.S. So what propels me to wear my politics on my sleeves? And why don't I see passionate conservatives doing likewise?

Is it that conservatives fear for their safety? Do conservatives consider such displays of preference to be tacky or uncouth? Or is it just the nature of conservative behavior to be reserved and private about such things?

I find it curious and puzzling.

I'd love to hear from anyone else who has noticed this phenomenon and has pondered the reasons for it.

The Path of Righteousness

Obrigado, Tim Maia. The grandfather of Brazilian Funk. Enjoy.

Debate Reaction

I personally thought Obama won this clearly. He was smooth, convincing, composed, and knowledgable. McCain seemed desperate and petty. But I've checked out some conservative blogs and the folks there are living in a fantasy world. They think (for the third time, no less!) that McCain won this debate. And yet almost every survey of focus groups (even the FoxNews focus group) gave the debate to Obama. What kind of ozone layer do these people live in? Just goes to show you that we see what we want to see in these debates. I guess McCain spoke to his narrow base looking for something to cheer; and Obama appealed to folks like me who are already sold on his policies and his delivery style, which he provided in abundance tonight.

Best reaction to the debate, though, came from Mrs. Huckupchuck who said that McCain's performance can be summed up accordingly: "Grasping and Gasping" -- meaning Grasping at straws and gasping for air. I think that pretty much captures it in a nutshell.

We'll see what the next few days' polling reveals, but I'm going out on a limb and declaring: "McCain is toast."

In fact, I'll go one further: I think McCain is so toasted that I predict a Louisiana upset for Obama on election day. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Reggie Bush is Real

You know, I haven't exactly been the kind of die-hard Reggie Bush fan as many have been; but I do have to say that anyone who puts up these numbers over a six week period has got to be doing something right. 8 TDs in six games, spread out fairly evenly over rushing TDs (2), receiving TDs (3), and return TDs (3), is pretty damn impressive, no matter how you slice it up.

I know Jeffrey can always find that trip up, that dropped pass, that fumble, etc., to try to suppress the real accomplishments of Bush this season; but that only gets you so far. I'd say that Reggie Bush is delivering this year in ways that just don't merit the criticism. One doesn't need to be a Reggie Bush fan to acknowledge this. What say you, Jeffrey? Care to give at least a grudging compliment to the Who Dats' Black and Gold #25?

Bicentennial of Latino Journalism in the US

Is being celebrated this Wednesday at the New Orleans Museum of Art, first with a press event at 11:30am. Later on that afternoon, from 5-7pm, at the same place (NOMA), there will be a reception in honor of El Misisipi, the first Spanish-language Latino newspaper published in the United States. Come out and join the celebration!

Democrats = Nazis

The rightwing fear-smear machine, via conservative blogger John Hawkins, goes there:

When I called this the most dangerous time for America since WW2, I was dead serious. Barack Obama with a large Democrat majority in Congress, an adoring media, and a big crisis to work will be nearly as dangerous to this country's future trying to "help" as Nazi Germany was trying to kill us. That's no exaggeration. They literally may be able to do damage that our country will NEVER recover from...

Why Todd Palin Is Important

This morning, The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan referenced Harper's Scott Horton’s puzzlement over the Palin email hacker incident. This sentence in Horton's piece caught my attention:

The hacker also helped establish a motive for the illegal conduct: Palin regularly involved her husband in official business, and it’s easy to understand why she did not want to leave behind evidence of her husband’s involvement.

Let me explain why I sat a bit more upright in my chair this morning when I read that sentence. I have often had conversations with my in-laws, who are people that Andrew Sullivan would identify as Christianist, as indeed they are. As such, they are biblical literalists and fundamentalists who I imagine support Palin for all the obvious reasons. [UPDATE: I should also say that my in-laws are wonderful people. I am very fond of them and they are extremely generous and good-hearted folks.] But I also remember having had a conversation with my in-laws one time about the proper relationship between husband and wife. For them, the biblical mandate that wives should submit themselves to the authority of their husbands was serious business. Here's what Paul says in his letter to the Ephesians (5:22-24):

22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

That made me wonder, knowing what we know about Sarah Palin’s Christianism, whether or not she and Todd ascribe to the same basic philosophy and theology. Since we apparently can’t ask them this, I think we simply have to assume that they do. And Horton’s comment about Sarah Palin using private emails to involve her husband in official business seems to confirm this assumption. What this means, though, outside of the fact that Sarah Palin was engaging in illegal activity, is that it is all the more imperative that we find out what we can, not only about Sarah Palin, but also about Todd Palin.

And though it is not the custom of secular American democracy to view spouses of candidates in this way, we are not really dealing with a candidate who embraces the values of secular American democracy.

So, please, let's find out who this Todd Palin is. One disturbing thing we do know about Todd Palin is that he belonged to the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party. Here's what one of the founders of the Alaskan Independence Party, Joe Vogler, had to say about America (at about 1:42-1:50 in the audio clip):

The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American Government, and I won't be buried under their damned flag.

And here's Sarah Palin addressing the Alaskan Independence Party Convention:



It is fair to wonder if Sarah Palin's Christianist submission to her husband might have anything to do with this. And it is also fair to wonder if Todd Palin's biblical authority over his wife might have more bearing on Sarah Palin's potential behavior and role as Vice President. My feeling is that Todd Palin is probably more important to understanding Sarah Palin, and what she is likely to do as Vice-President, than anyone has let on to date.

McCain/Palin Supporters, Part II

The anger, misinformation, and outright smears are legion.

It is so absurd it is almost cartoonish. It might even be humorous for its absurdity if it weren't so sad in its reality.

And McCain is encouraging such reactions, not attempting to mitigate them.

I believe that we will look back on this electoral campaign, and this particular moment in the election period, and be embarrassed for the GOP and for conservatism. What the GOP has done to itself is almost too painful to watch.

McCain/Palin Supporters

How can any decent person tolerate and support a campaign that encourages and sells this message?

What will the GOP and these people do if Obama is elected in November? If people really believe this about Obama, what will be their patriotic duty in November should Obama be President? Accept that a "terrorist" is leading their country? Does this give the "war on terror" a new meaning? What would you do if you really thought someone was a terrorist with friends who try to kill your family? It is utterly despicable and completely irresponsible. Look at the viciousness and anger of these folks, whipped up into a frenzy by the narrative now being promoted officially by McCain. The closest I have ever seen of this kind of frenzied anger are old news reels of anti-desegregationist rallies of the 50s. The potential outcome of this strategy is terrifying, truly terrifying.

[H/T Andrew Sullivan]

Some More Gutterballing

From Cindy McCain:

“The day that Senator Obama decided to cast a vote to not fund my son while he was serving sent a cold chill through my body, let me tell you,” Mrs. McCain said. “I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day.”

Ummm ... let's remember, Mrs. McCain, that Obama was the only candidate in this election that said that your son shouldn't be risking his life in an unnecessary war in Iraq. If you're worried about your son's safety, I suggest you have a frank discussion the next time you and your hubby have a chance to chat about the war that he supported and which your son is now thrust into. I find it funny that a "cold chill" wasn't sent through your body the moment your husband voted to authorize war in the first place, because that's when the real danger to your son's life was born. I guarantee you, Mrs. McCain, that more parents of soldiers were "chilled" that day, than on any other. And what was Obama doing on that "chilly" day? Arguing against sending your son into harm's way. And that's not even considering that the vote Mrs. McCain is referring to is the ONLY vote Obama cast against funding for troops, and ONLY because the measure didn't include a timeline for withdrawal that would have warmed the hearts of most parents of soldiers.

And at the very event where Cindy McCain spewed such nonsense, we get Lehigh County Republican Bill Platt "warming up" the crowd for McCain by referring twice to "Barack Hussein Obama":



You want to know why this matters? Watch this:



If you think Bill Platt isn't consciously and purposefully referring to Obama as "Barack Hussein Obama" with the specific intent of tapping into this grossly ignorant and racist segment of the population with the intent of winning this population's support, then you are being wilfully blind and naive. This is not some GOP hack at some local event spouting off at the mouth. No, siree! This is happening at events orchestrated by the McCain campaign where McCain is being introduced! And if you don't think the introductory remarks by these "crowd warmers" aren't carefully crafted, reviewed, and sanctioned by the McCain campaign, then your blindness and naivete is approaching ostrich territory (i.e. head in the sand). And though the McCain campaign repudiated this tactic by Bill Platt, I don't believe for a moment the sincerity of their rejection. It comes after the damage is done, and it happens repeatedly at events like this. It's like: "Oopsie! Sorry about that! Uncalled for." (wink, wink).

But then there's the icing on the cake. McCain's campaign has released a statement from a person named John M. Murtagh that takes the Obama/Ayers connection to a whole new level. In essence, the McCain campaign is propagating the idea that Obama is a terrorist killer by association. Here's how this smear ends: "Barack Obama's friend tried to kill my family." How does one try to unpack this despicable and reprehensible smear? Where is McCain's dignity and honor?

I said it before and I'll say it again: It's unconscionable for any decent person to support the McCain/Palin ticket.

What would the McCain Campaign Do ...

with this statement from Sarah Palin:

“They [U.S. soldiers] are also building schools for the Afghan children so that there is hope and opportunity in our neighboring country of Afghanistan.”

Probably something like this ...

They'd send some gutterball smearmongering flunky (probably the VP candidate herself, ironically) out to bark:

Look what she's sayin' now! She's callin' Afghanistan "our neighboring country." Can you believe it?!?! You betcha! Now, ya wanna know which countries are "neighboring" Afghanistan? Try Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Iran! Makes ya wonder, don't it, (wink, wink) if Palin doesn't actually think she's livin' in one of these stalwarts of democracy (wink, wink)! Perhaps she's engagin' in a bit of wishful thinkin', though, and feels envious of the kind of "neighbors" Afghanistan really has and would like to be one of them terrorist-harborin', terrorist-lovin' "neighbors."

I really hope that reasonable Americans are horrified at what the McCain campaign has become. What kind of major political party in America in this day and age sends its VP-candidate around to rallies to stoke up the kind of rabid hate -- reminiscent of lynch-mobs of the past -- that would result in one of the rally-goer's reacting to this incendiary hate language about Barack Obama by shouting out: "Kill him!" It's absolutely shocking and astonishing that it would not only come to this, but actually be tolerated by and propagated by the GOP.

Sarah Palin might think she's just taking the gloves off; but what this incompetent joke of a national leader seems to fail to realize is that she's also pulling the noose out and dangling it tantalizingly in front of the noses of some very angry, unstable, and hate-filled people.

It's unconscionable for any decent person to support the McCain/Palin ticket.

Racist Underlings in the McCain/Palin Campaign and the Virginia GOP

Read this and try not to get too angry.

Where's the color-blind conservative outcry over this? And the dude who wrote the piece is part of the McCain Leadership Team in Virginia?!?

VOTE this November! And VOTE for Obama/Biden.

McCain Can't Gutterball This ...

I hope this story makes the rounds of viral emails. So many anti-Obama smear emails that are patently untrue get circulated among the rightwing hater crowds. Let's counter with something admirable about Obama. Here's the story in full from Leisha Camden's blog:

Mary lacked money to fly home to Norway – he saved her love

ÅSGÅRDSTRAND (VG): Mary was a newlywed and ready to move to Norway, but was stopped at the airport because she didn’t have enough money for the trip. Then a stranger turned up and paid for her.

Mary Menth Andersen was 31 years old at the time and had just married Norwegian Dag Andersen. She was looking forward to starting a new life in Åsgårdstrand in Vestfold with him. But first she had to get all of her belongings across to Norway. The date was November 2nd, 1988.

At the airport in Miami things were hectic as usual, with long lines at the check-in counters. When it was finally Mary’s turn and she had placed her luggage on the baggage line, she got the message that would crush her bubbling feeling of happiness.

-You’ll have to pay a 103 dollar surcharge if you want to bring both those suitcases to Norway, the man behind the counter said.

Mary had no money. Her new husband had travelled ahead of her to Norway, and she had no one else to call.

-I was completely desperate and tried to think which of my things I could manage without. But I had already made such a careful selection of my most prized possessions, says Mary.

Although she explained the situation to the man behind the counter, he showed no signs of mercy.

-I started to cry, tears were pouring down my face and I had no idea what to do. Then I heard a gentle and friendly voice behind me saying, That’s OK, I’ll pay for her.

Mary turned around to see a tall man whom she had never seen before.

-He had a gentle and kind voice that was still firm and decisive. The first thing I thought was, Who is this man?

Although this happened 20 years ago, Mary still remembers the authority that radiated from the man.

-He was nicely dressed, fashionably dressed with brown leather shoes, a cotton shirt open at the throat and khaki pants, says Mary.

She was thrilled to be able to bring both her suitcases to Norway and assured the stranger that he would get his money back. The man wrote his name and address on a piece of paper that he gave to Mary. She thanked him repeatedly. When she finally walked off towards the security checkpoint, he waved goodbye to her.

The piece of paper said ‘Barack Obama’ and his address in Kansas, which is the state where his mother comes from. Mary carried the slip of paper around in her wallet for years, before it was thrown out.

-He was my knight in shining armor, says Mary, smiling.

She paid the 103 dollars back to Obama the day after she arrived in Norway. At that time he had just finished his job as a poorly paid community worker in Chicago, and had started his law studies at prestigious Harvard university.

In the spring of 2006 Mary’s parents had heard that Obama was considering a run for president, but that he had still not decided. They chose to write a letter in which they told him that he would receive their votes. At the same time, they thanked Obama for helping their daughter 18 years earlier.

In a letter to Mary’s parents dated May 4th, 2006 and stamped ‘United States Senate, Washington DC’, Barack Obama writes:

‘I want to thank you for the lovely things you wrote about me and for reminding me of what happened at Miami airport. I’m happy I could help back then, and I’m delighted to hear that your daughter is happy in Norway. Please send her my best wishes. Sincerely, Barack Obama, United States senator.’

The parents sent the letter on to Mary.

This week VG met her and her husband in the café that she runs with her friend Lisbeth Tollefsrud in Åsgårdstrand.

-It’s amazing to think that the man who helped me 20 years ago may now become the next US president, says Mary delightedly.

She has already voted for Obama. She recently donated 100 dollars to his campaign.

She often tells the story from Miami airport, both when race issues are raised and when the conversation turns to the presidential elections.

-I sincerely hope the Americans will see reason and understand that Obama means change, says Mary.

Visit Leisha Camden's blog where you can get some more context and see a picture of Mary holding what appears to be Barack Obama's letter to her parents that's mentioned in the article. The comments section to Leisha Camden's blog posting also discusses the authenticity of the story and some translation matters. Of course, I can't vouch for the story's authenticity, but it sounds believable to me. A simple act of kindness that Obama never mentions nor brags on. Contrast that untouted act of kindness to Sarah Palin's running around and implying that Obama is some kind of terrorist sympathizer.

I'll take Barack Obama's brand of Christian kindness and charity over Sarah Palin's fundagelical smear and fearmongering any day of the week.

Gutterballing Obama

Yep. I knew it. It's all they have left. If they can't beat Obama on the issues, then all they can do is go after the man in the most seedy ways possible.

My prediction: backfire.

People are just sick and tired of gutterball politics. When folks are in economic pain, they want empathy, not bullying. McCain's going to show us all how, when times are tough, all he can do is name-call and drive the knife in deeper on subjects completely unrelated and irrelevant to my worries.

The problem for McCain, though, is that we've already been through all the dirt they plan to rehash, and we've made our minds up about them as well.

Obama needs to be ready to respond forcefully and strongly, but to keep his eye on what people are really tuning into. When times get tough for people, they're not going to worry about Ayers or Rezko or Wright -- they're going to want to know how the candidates will help ease their pain and address their worries with concrete plans and policies.

Bailout Blues

For what it's worth, I'm opposed to the bailout plan (I refuse to call it a "rescue" plan) that just passed the Congress and was signed into law. I opposed the original plan, too. This whole bailout is based on fear and scaring the middle/lower classes, it privileges the wealthy, it has avoided any kind of public scrutiny and deliberation, it was rammed down our throats, and it just makes it all the more difficult in the end for my children to live without the burden of a crushing national debt hanging over their heads. I say let Wall Street and Main Street take whatever lumps we've got coming.

The VP Question

You know, I just had a revelation. Now that the VP debate is over, the whole debate about the VP is over. From now on out, this race is about McCain and Obama. In my mind, the VP issue is settled, and there's probably nothing that will happen between now and the election that would change that. I think that in most people's minds, the VP issue is settled, and Palin falls out on the short end of the stick. But I suspect we are beyond her. As the month of October campaigning gets heated up, we're going to hear and see and focus much, much more on Obama and McCain. And I'm actually looking forward to that. The Palin phenomenon is now spent. McCain's Palin gambit is played out, and it has come up short. There's nothing more McCain can do, except to go gutterball negative on Obama, to win this thing. My impression is that this election is Obama's to lose. As long as Obama doesn't commit any major mistakes or makes any major gaffes, he's got the election won.

Palin Survives

And that could be a blessing in disguise for the Democrats and a curse on the McCain campaign. Palin didn't crash and burn, but in terms of knowledge and ideas and sincere thoughtfulness, she was canned and hollow. Because Sarah Palin didn't embarrass herself, that's a victory for her; but she obviously had nothing but schooled answers. She rarely answered the questions asked and went back almost too regularly to talking points. She never seemed to have an original thought. But no matter, she didn't melt on stage, and so she lives for another day. And now we get to see her perform (hopefully!) more regularly in front of the American people in more unscripted interviews and press conferences, where she'll have to demonstrate her knowledge chops, which are still really very thin. If McCain shelters her from any press conferences from now until November, the American people will notice and will assume the worst for it.

Biden, for his part, came across as very knowledgable, almost too knowledgable. I think Biden won the debate on the issues, but Sarah Palin held up well on the stage. Palin did much better than I expected. I didn't expect much from her, and she exceeded what I did expect of her. Biden didn't put his foot in his mouth, as I feared he might, and did better than I expected, too. In fact, Biden came across as humble, committed, secure, and thoughtful. When he spoke, it was clear that we were getting Joe Biden and not DNC talking points. And I have to say that Joe Biden connected on a human level in ways that he hasn't done in the past. He showed empathy and emotion and graciousness.

Will this change the course of the election? I don't believe so.

Palin the Post Turtle

This piece of political humor is making the internet/email/blog rounds:

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old rancher, who's hand was caught in the gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Palin and her bid.

The old rancher said, "Well, ya know, Palin is a Post Turtle."

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a 'post turtle' was.

The old rancher said, "When you're driving down a country road you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post turtle.'"

The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face so he continued to explain. "You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, and she doesn't know what to do while she's up there, and you just wonder what kind of dummy put her up there to begin with."

Heh! If you want a visual image of Palin, the Post Turtle, click here.

McCain's Favorite Movie?

Elia Kazan's Viva Zapata!

A movie about one of Mexico's most famous peasant revolutionaries whose mission in life was to have land taken from greedy landowners, land that they stole from the largely indigenous peasantry, and then to have this land given back to the indigenous peasantry by government fiat.

Property expropriation, wealth redistribution, class warfare on the side of the peasant workers, and anti-capitalist revolution -- all in Mexico!

Frankly, I love the movie, too!

But somehow I don't think it's gonna sit well with the conservative base!