Seeing the Forest for the Trees

I'm a genuine wearer of the tinfoil hat, so I'm going to use a couple of posters on Jack and Jill Politics to convey my view of the forest when it comes to Barack Obama and his ' troubles':

From Craig Hickman:

I just want to add that Barack is still fighting a nomination battle.

The goal is to get him behind in the polls by some significant percentage and length of time prior to the Denver convention.

Make no mistake: the FISA bill's rush through Congress, the wag-the-dog national security "threats" that are piling on each other, Hillary's FISA vote, her delegates behind-the-scenes maneuvering...

Barack doesn't just challenge Republicans, he also challenges the Democratic power structure. Notice how many Senators have refused to endorse him openly.

Remember, Barack jumped to the front of the line. He didn't "wait his turn."

Barack wants Brandenburg Gate and a 75,000-seat stadium acceptance speech. Some say he's showing hubris. That's one way to look at it.

Another way:

He wants to make it increasingly difficult for a convention coup (a reclamation by the plutocrats that is) in Denver.

That might read as paranoid, but I couldn't help myself from saying, 'Uh huh' while reading it.

See, Craig, b-serious, iceberg, NMP, myself and others..we might be wearing the tinfoil hat on this, and maybe we're not. Maybe we see the forest for the trees, and we see a whole lotta snakes in that grass. I'm with Craig on this and have written about that Obama has ALWAYS been a threat, not to the Republicans, but to the Democrats too.

NMP has posted extensively as the disrespect that she sees coming Obama's way from 'The Progressives'. Disrespect that she doesn't believe she's seen with other nominees:

Am I the only negro concerned by the far white Left's seeming attempt to sabotage Senator Obama's campaign? This feigned surprise and outrage over his centrist policy positions is getting on my last damn nerves!

Come the hell on! The speech that introduced Barack Obama to the world was a centrist speech. He made clear that he was not a political idealogue and that the country would be better served by moving from the far Left and Right. The policy prescriptions laid out in detail in his best selling book were mostly centrist. So, why the hell are they acting as if his current--and long held--views are a surprise?

It never fails how white folks assign their own fantasies on black leaders. It's eerily reminiscent of how Dr. King was treated when he spoke out on the Vietnam War. Despite having published numerous writings that reflected a far more dimensional socio-political world view, white folks defined him by one speech and made him the poster child for black forgiveness and non-confrontation.

Today, despite being on record supporting the death penalty; expressing ambivalence about abortion, particularly late-term; supporting individual gun ownership coupled with sensible gun control policy; and never ever being afraid to discuss religion in the public square, white Liberals are now shocked and surprised?

.......................................................................................

We've been allowing white Liberals to take our vote for granted for decades. We supported Bill Clinton and the Democrats through 3 strikes laws; the Omnibus crime bill which resulted in far more erosion of the 4th amendment and defendent's rights than telecom immunity; Bill Clinton overseeing the execution of a retarded black man; qualified black candidates with aspirations for state-wide office being push aside time-and-time again for white candidates, including white women. Despite all of this, black folks have shown the political maturity to support the Democratic Party even when the Party hasn't supported us! And now white folks like you want to say they are not willing to make the same compromise for a black candidate?!

Senator Obama WON the nomination, and he has EVERY right to set his own agenda, just like every previous white candidate has done. There has not been a white democratic nominee that hasn't taken more conservative positions to win, including Bill Clinton who was FAR more conservative on social issues than Senator Obama.

Why are black bloggers sitting back while they are trying to make him bow down?

I stopped going to DailyKos because they lost their damn minds over FISA. I've said from the beginning that I disagreed with Obama over FISA. But, it's not enough to make me stop supporting him. Nobody can tell me that these folks that this is THE overarching issue in their lives. I'm not buying it.

As for Obama ' tacking to the center'..

On the Death Penalty, YOU can defend child rapists....we don't need a Black man on tv defending child rapists..

The Second Amendment....is what it is. I'm a supporter of it, as are millions of Americans. Yes, you stand for gun control and see how many states in the middle of this country Obama gets.

The elections in this country are won or lost on independents. Unless you're out personally registering 100 Progressives everyday, elections are won with independents.

The man won the nomination, and should get to put forth the agenda of his choice. It's not like he's going to scrap the Democratic Party Platform. Indeed, he's opened up the process to the average person sending in sugeestions. Part of that ' transparency in government' thing.

The Christian Progressive Liberal pointed out that the entire holding up the money for Obama is to pressure him to take Hillpatine on his ticket. On that, I still say HELL NO. I'm so tired of every candidate in Modern Political History being able to do what they want to do, UNTIL THE BLACK MAN WINS.

I.don't.think.so.

That's part of the forest for the trees.

Nader can't win.
McKinney can't win.

So, you have a choice between Obama and McCain.

Don't BS me about there being no clear choice between these two. You know better.

Could this really be over?

Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat, who has been a strong supporter of Senator Hillary Clinton, correctly said, "We pledged to support her to the end. Our problem is not being able to determine when the hell the end is."

Could this be true? Could all of this be over? I'll believe it when I see it. Keith Olbermann is reporting that several Senators and other Hillary supporters have asked for her to formally get out of the race. This will happen on Friday in Washington DC. That's right. Hillary Clinton will formally endorse Barack Obama and suspend/terminate/end/quit her campaign.

Democrats, it is unity time!!!

Obama Draws Crowd of 75,000 in Oregon

From HuffingtonPost.com:

Obama Draws Record Crowd Of 75,000 In Portland
The Huffington Post
May 18, 2008 06:45 PM



The Washington Post reports from Obama's rally in Portland, Oregon:

Sen. Barack Obama has seen his share of large crowds over the last 15 months, but his campaign said they have not approached the numbers gathered along the waterfront here right now.

The campaign, citing figures from Duane Bray, battalion chief of Portland Fire & Rescue, estimated that 75,000 people are watching him speak.

The scene suggests this is not an exaggeration. The sea of heads stretches for half a mile along the grassy embankment, while others watch from kayaks and power boats bobbing on the Willamette River. More hug the rails of the steel bridge that stretches across the water and crowds are even watching from jetties on the opposite shore.

Another account from the Swamp:

The crowd covers the lawn here at Tom McCall Waterfront Park, from the streetside entry gates down to the Willamette River. Portland fire officials estimate 60,000 people are packed inside the park proper and another 10-15,000 are watching outside the gates. Spectators are lining the bridge behind Obama and watching, bikini-clad, from boats on the river.

The stump speech is Obama's standard riff - 30 minutes long and counting now, despite the sun beating down on the candidate. He's added a few Oregonian flourishes, drawing big cheers when he said the country can learn from Portland's commitment to mass transit and bicycle lanes. The biggest applause came when he denounced the Iraq war; Oregon is a hotbed of anti-war activism.

At one point, someone in the crowd shouted an expression of love at Obama. He broke his speech for a moment: "I love you too," he said.

"If you vote for me on Tuesday," he said, "We won't just win Oregon. We'll win this nomination, we'll win this general election. And you and I together, we'll change this country, we'll change the world."

Seventy-five thousand people seemed to like the sound of that.

Now....estimate with me people...

How many of those were HARD WORKING WHITES?

Of course, we just know that Oregon doesn't count because of its large Black population....(sarcasm dripping here).

Nevada Statewide Convention: Obama 14 Delegates, Clinton 11

Hat tip: truthseeker at JJP

From the blog, The Field

Nevada Statewide Convention: Obama 14 Delegates, Clinton 11
By Al Giordano

Today’s news from Nevada confirms that there’s been “many a slip twixt the cup and the lip” when it comes to last January 19th’s declarations that Clinton had “won” the Nevada caucuses.

First came the reality-check that Obama’s greater support in the state’s rural counties provided him with one more delegate - thirteen in total - to Clinton’s twelve.

Today came the final step in the process from precinct caucuses to county conventions to the statewide convention. The Reno Gazette-Journal reports:

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama succeeded in driving more supporters to the Nevada state convention than his opponent U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, who had won the state in the Jan. 19 caucuses. Obama essentially reversed Clinton’s lead from the caucuses, capturing 55 percent of the state delegates to Clinton’s 45 percent.

The heavy turnout earned Obama one more delegate to the national convention, than previously expected based on the caucus results.

The final tally: Obama won 14 national delegates and Clinton won 11 national delegates. Under the caucus results, Obama was expected to win 13 national delegates to Clinton’s 12. Although Clinton won the caucuses, Obama out-performed her in rural Nevada and Washoe County.

The convention has one more delegate to name, although that person goes to the national convention unpledged.

Some Clinton supporters have begun to give up and, despite being elected delegates, stayed home, while the Obama grassroots organization proved tireless, taking no prisoners, and grabbing another Democratic National Convention delegate away from the tired Clinton camp, for a net gain of +2.

See Also: Patrick Coolican’s Happier Days for Democrats in today’s Las Vegas Sun.

*********************************************

I guess it was all those latte-sipping Black folk in RURAL NEVADA that put Obama over the top. (yes, sarcasm dripping here)

Even now, Obama's campaign keeps its nose to the grindstone and doesn't lose focus. Don't tell me he hasn't earned everything in this campaign; his organization, from top to bottom, has been first-rate.

Obama Returns To Iowa

Where will Barack Obama be on the night of May 20th, the night that is presumed he will cross the threshhold of 1627 - which is 50%+1 of the Pledged Delegates?

In Iowa, where it all began January 3, 2008.


From the Obama Campaign:

The rally will be outdoors. Barack will be joined by Michelle and thousands, at the corner of E. 6th Street and E. Locust Street in Des Moines, Iowa.

According to the advisory: “The public can enter the rally at the corner of E. 6th Street and Grand Avenue. Tickets are NOT required but those who want to attend are strong encouraged to RSVP at BarackObama.com"



Obama stands today at 1612.5 Pledged Delegates.


From BarackObama.com

Delegate watch:

Total Delegates: 1910
Pledged Delegates Needed (to hit 1627): 14.5
Total Delegates Needed for Nomination (to hit 2025): 115


Iowa IS considered a swing state in the General Election, and Obama has a slim lead over McCain currently in the polls.

NARAL Endorses Barack Obama

From Naralprochoiceamerica.com

NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA ENDORSES SEN. BARACK OBAMA




Washington, DC - Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, released the following statement today, announcing that her organization's political action committee proudly endorses Sen. Barack Obama for president.

"Today, NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC is proud to endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president. Sen. Obama has been a strong advocate for a woman's right to choose throughout his career in public office. He steadfastly supports and defends a woman's right to make the most personal, private decisions regarding her reproductive health without interference from government or politicians.

"Sen. Obama has been a leader on this issue in the United States Senate. Since joining the Senate in 2005, he has worked to unite Americans on both side of this debate behind commonsense, common-ground ways to prevent unintended pregnancy. Sen. Obama supports legislation to provide our teens with comprehensive sex education, prevent pharmacies from denying women access to their legal birth-control prescriptions, and increase access to family-planning services.

"We are confident that Barack Obama is the candidate of the future. Americans are tired of the divisive politics of the last eight years, and will unite behind Obama in the fall. We look forward to working with a pro-choice Obama White House in January."

Keenan also praised Senator Clinton as a pro-choice leader. "Americans have been fortunate to have two fully pro-choice candidates in the race for the Democratic nomination. But only one can go forward to the general election. It is truly historic for us to have these two outstanding candidates in the race."

Ah, to be a fly on the wall when Camp Hillpatine found out.

Biggest Election of the Night - Mississippi's First District

Hat tip: ms. martin at JJP

The results for the Mississippi First District Special Election:

This is Northern Mississippi. The seat was vacated when Congressman Wicker became Senator Wicker when Trent Lott resigned.

This is a SOLID REPUBLICAN SEAT.

IN MISSISSIPPI.

Results:


93% of Precincts Reporting
Travis W. Childers (D): 53% (54029)
Greg Davis (R): 47% (47361)



YES, this is one of those seats where they tried to Swiftboat the candidate by tying him to Obama and Rev. Wright.

Mississippi, people.

First, Hastert's seat.
Then, the Louisiana seat a couple of weeks back.

Tonight, Mississippi.

This was it. The last ' argument' Hillpatine had against Obama to the SuperDelegates - his potential to be a ' drag' on downticket Democrats.

Childers WON a solid GOP seat in MISSISSIPPI.

Biggest election of the night.

Operation Anti-Chaos: The Narrative on ' White Voters' is FICTION

It's time for those of us who remotely consider ourselves Pro-Obama to fight back and push back on these false narratives that the MSM is trying to spin.

One of those is " Obama can't win the White vote", all the while, NEVER asking Clinton how the hell she intends to win the BASE of the Democratic Party -Black folk - when her standing NOW with them is 59%.

Al Giordano, of the blog, The Field, has come up with an attack plan - use THE TRUTH.

Operation Anti-Chaos: The Narrative on “White Voters” Is Fiction
By Al Giordano

I turn on the TV, read the political columnists (and a significant number of analytically-challenged bloggers, too) and all I hear is a bunch of white folk prattling on about their favorite narrative: “Obama’s losing white voters!”

They’ve swallowed the Clinton racially-obsessed spin, hook, line and sinker. Some, because they are gullible, haven’t an original idea in their little pea brains, and follow the pack of what everybody else is talking about. Others, because they like to toss around knowing falsehoods. Nary a superdelegate can go on Fox News without being berated by an anchorperson screeching (this is pretty close to an exact quote): “But your duty as a superdelegate is to select the most electable and that’s Hillary Clinton!” That these anchorpersons are Republican partisans openly cheering for Senator Clinton is our first clue of the game afoot. One of the major successes of Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos is that it has got all the right-wing pundits and reporters marching lockstep behind the effort to give Clinton enough oxygen to keep slashing away at Senator Obama, who remains the prohibitive likely Democratic nominee.

And when Clinton wins state primaries that, because of demographics, she was always going to win - last week, Pennsylvania and next week, Indiana - they then wave that event up like a blood-soaked flag as proof of their narrative: See? See? We told you so! White people won’t vote for Obama!

So imagine my pleasant surprise this morning to see a New York Times columnist, Charles Blow, who did what none of these chattering lunkheads have done. He looked at the hard data of how voters, white and black, view the two Democratic candidates - favorably or negatively? - and how those views have progressed over time. The data is based on multiple CBS-New York Times polls (among the most respected survey outfits among competing pollsters) over two years and more. Check it out:

Nobody - not blogger, nor superdelegate, nor cable news anchor - should open their mouths with another word about this contest until they’ve studied those graphs and the numbers upon which they are based. Blow explains:

Since January, the Clintons have pummeled Barack Obama with racially tinged comments and questions about his character…

The question is this: Have white Democrats soured on Obama? Apparently not. Although his unfavorable rating from the group is up five percentage points since last summer in polls conducted by The New York Times and CBS News, his favorable rating is up just as much.

Wait. The numbers show that the cynical effort to turn the 2008 campaign into a race riot has hurt the popularity of one candidate among an important demographic, and it’s not Barack Obama:

On the other hand, black Democrats’ opinion of Hillary Clinton has deteriorated substantially (her favorable rating among them is down 36 percentage points over the same period).

So, to sum up: Look at the damn graphs. You can see that Clinton is in a staggering free-fall among African-American voters, her favorability is down 36 points while 17 percent view her more negatively than before, while Obama’s favorable and negative ratings among whites have paired at five point increases. You can even see the small dip - about two percentage points - in his popularity among whites that can be attributed to the news cycles about his ex-pastor, and see that it has leveled out and is now on a straight horizontal line (meanwhile, Clinton’s numbers among blacks continue on an extreme downward precipice). The greater context is that even including Obama’s slight dip, he’s more popular today among white voters than he ever was prior to February.

Not since Ronald Reagan has an American presidential candidate withstood such an assault in the media and seen his popularity not hurt by it, but, rather, galvanized by it. That’s what is meant, in politics, by the term “Teflon.”

Those facts won’t stop many media (and Internet) talking heads from continuing - whether out of gullibility or intentional dishonesty - to prop up the “white voters” narrative, but it ought to inoculate you, kind reader, from believing it.

Don’t let yourself get upset when some idiot repeats the false media narrative. Don’t plead with them to tell the truth (they won’t; remember, they’re either stupid or dishonest). Mock them. Ridicule them. Expose them as the lightweights they are showing themselves to be, with all the confidence that understanding the hard data ought to provide you.

Let Operation Anti-Chaos begin!

**********************************

We need to spread the truth: DIGG this, go to The Field and DIGG the original; Post this on your own blogs; spread the links to this in emails. Send it to the local columnists in your town. Stop the Clinton LIES with THE TRUTH. Electability is a two way problem, and Hillpatine's got SERIOUS Electability issues.It's time to go on the offensive; do something pro-active, instead of re-active.

Sign An Open Letter To Democratic Leaders Demanding They Not Overturn The Will Of Voters

For those of you who want to take action about this election process, Jack Turner over at Jack and Jill Politics has this suggestion:



This is it. Something to do. We know what the problem is. ColorOfChange is motivating. Let's get behind this.

Here's an excerpt:

Some leaders in the Democratic Party are playing with fire. They think that they can betray the will of millions of voters and choose Hillary Clinton as the nominee, regardless of whether or not she is the choice of the voters. We can't let this happen. It would be the largest disenfranchisement in modern history, and it would mean the Democratic Party giving their stamp of approval to a clear and consistent pattern of race-baiting by the Clinton campaign.

If we make our voices heard, we can stop it. Please join us in signing an open letter to leaders in the Democratic Party -- DNC Chair Howard Dean, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and all superdelegates -- demanding that they reject an outcome that involves trampling voting rights and legitimizing the politics of division and fear

By the time the last vote is cast on June 3rd under the rules of the Democratic Party, it's unlikely Hillary Clinton will beat Barack Obama among voters.1 But there's a chance that superdelegates will hand Clinton the nomination anyway.

This would be a shocking attack on democracy, and it would destroy the Democratic Party's credibility on protecting the right to vote. Black people have a long history of fighting against voter suppression, and now the Democratic Party will be the enemy in that fight. As bad as that would be, there's another reason that a coup by party insiders would threaten racial progress.

Senator Clinton's plan to have superdelegates hand her the nomination relies on a parallel strategy -- she has to stoke enough division and race-based fear among Democratic voters to convince superdelegates that white voters will not vote for Senator Obama in the general election.(2) One of Clinton's key arguments to superdelegates is that America won't elect a Black man, and therefore she's the better choice for Democrats to beat John McCain.(3,4) While she makes that argument in private to superdelegates, in public, Clinton's campaign and her surrogates are doing everything they can to damage Barack Obama by ginning up fear and division and playing to the worst instincts of our society. It's an insult to Black people and all Americans, Obama and Clinton supporters alike.

Sign The Letter

Spread this letter. Use the links below to email it. DIGG IT.

This is something worth fighting for. This is not just for black people. This is for all who care about the Democratic Party or the fate of the country. The Party must be made aware that it is playing with fire and has already waited far too long. This situation never would have been allowed to continue if Barack Obama's name was John Edwards.

Look at the Republicans. Look how much smarter they are. Their candidates saw the wrath of the math in favor of McCain, whom they hate, but Romney and Huckabee both stepped aside for the good of the win. The Democrats are acting like they really don't want to win.

John McCain is getting a free ride in the media while this nonsense continues. This is not helping the party. This is not helping the country. The Democratic Party needs to come correct. Soon.

Sign the letter, and spread the word.