HISTORY!!!

Democratic Party Officially Nominates Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States

It's different once it becomes official. Funny how it just kinda crept up on us. This moment almost got lost in the back and forth of tv punditry. Thank God it didn't.

It was absolutely beautiful! This is a very special moment. To see tears of JOY . . . to see happiness instead of the divisiveness we've seen for months . . . seeing tears of joy at the realization of this historic moment . . . it's a beautiful thing!

I hope ya'll set your tivos. Because this is something I plan to show my grandchildren one day.

Obama is our nominee!

Props to Hillary for what she did today. Her symbolic gesture made it official and will hopefully go a long way towards party unity. I gotta give props where props are due. She came through today.

Now that the drama's over (hopefully . . .lol) . . .

LET'S WIN THIS THING!!!

No more doubts. No more drama. No more second-guessing. It's time to WIN!

OBAMA/BIDEN '08!! YES WE CAN!!!!!

Read more »

Remember . . . This is What We're Up Against (Part 2)

Because they’re willing to 'go there.'

One of the other reasons why Republicans keep winning elections is because they have no problems “going there.” And by “there” I’m referring to the politically taboo . . .

those imaginary lines in the sands of “decency” and “honor” . . .

those subjects that are supposedly so “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale” that no true statesman would dare cross them for fear of seeming distasteful, dishonorable or . . . well, straight up trifling!

You know. . . things like attacking a man’s patriotism; smearing a war veteran; politicizing our troops; using fear as a wedge issue; or evoking emotions of September 11th for partisan gain. Republicans never do that, right??? (wink, wink)

It might not be McCain himself. Heck, it might not even be a Republican. But someone is going to “go there” when the Republicans hold their convention in a little over a week from now. Even if McCain has to distance himself from the attack, expect some type of "Oh no he didn't!" moment when the Republicans meet in Minnesota.

So let’s take a walk down memory lane.

Exhibit A: Zell Miller’s keynote speech at the 2004 Republican Convention . . .


Wow. And that was just the Democratic speaker at the convention.

The Democratic Party should learn from past mistakes. See, back in 2004, Democrats tried doing the “honorable thing.” They figured that resentment towards Bush was so high they didn’t need to waste much time hammering the Republican ticket. So instead, they focused primarily on two goals: 1.) building John Kerry’s war hero status; and 2.) providing a new vision for the future . . . a post-partisan America.

Enter Senator Barack Obama and his memorable speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention.
In retrospect, Obama's introduction might have been the only shining moment from that entire convention. For Democrats did fail in one regard: They didn’t give their supporters enough red meat.

At the end of the day, most people have two major considerations when they step in that voting booth:

1. Why my guy should be president.
2. Why that other guy should NOT.

The weight for both of these considerations varies from person to person. Some people vote FOR what they like while others choose to vote AGAINST what they dislike. But, whatever the motive, a party must draw a clear and unequivocal picture of what they’re for AND against.

This is part 2 of an ongoing reminder to my left-of-center friends. I railed against the circular firing squad a few days ago. But this post is meant to take direct aim at the Democratic leadership. For while a lack of focus often serves as an Achilles heal in the Democratic base, a lack of fight has weakened our Democratic presidential candidates for far too long. It's another part of the equation that is necessary if we are to get out of own way and actually win this thing.

So my message to the Democratic leadership is this: GIVE US SOME RED MEAT!
It's hard to fight on an empty stomach. And, regardless of what the media tries to tell us, the words “fight” and “change” are not mutually exclusive.

It’s all about balance. I’m not looking for a convention filled with negativity. I'm not asking Obama to adopt Rovian style tactics or attack McCain's family. However, I am saying that the Democratic ticket shouldn't hesitate to defend itself. Nor should it shy away from making sharp, unrelenting criticisms of McCain and his platform.

I’m confident that an Obama/Biden ticket will fight back. But, make no doubt about it, this is the time to start fighting. The onus falls on the party to, not only tell us why Obama’s good for America, but to also remind us why McCain is BAD for America. Such a distinction might make the difference of a few dozen volunteers in a swing state. It might persuade an undecided voter. Democrats must give themselves every opportunity to win.

This is not the time to be shy. There’s no reason to think that Republicans won’t “go there" when it's their turn. Trust . . . they will.

Remember . . . this is what we're up against!

Read more »

Who's Convention is This!?!?

The Huffington Post and Associated Press are reporting that Senator Clinton will officially have her name placed in nomination at the Democratic Convention:

Clinton will speak on Aug. 26, the second night of the convention.

The next day, the state-by-state roll call of her name will take place.

While Democrats say the mechanics of how that will play out still are being determined, Clinton _ herself a superdelegate who gets a vote _ is expected to release her delegates to Obama, announce her support for him and ask her backers to do the same.

Her husband is slated to address the delegates that day, too . . . (The Huffington Post)

I really don't like this.

I understand the strategy behind it. I've heard the arguments for unity. And perhaps Obama stands to gain more by giving the Clintons no excuses than by resisting them on this point.

But I just don't like it. I know the media wants to ignore this little fact, but Senator Clinton is NOT some type of co-nominee. SHE LOST . . .

Yet she and Bill get two major speaking roles and a roll call??? All while some of her die hard supporters protest Obama's nomination in the streets of Denver and campaign for John McCain???

Please tell me . . . Just what. in. the. hell. . .has Hillary sacrificed for the sake of party unity?

I've seen her be a part of maybe two campaign events for Obama (both of which spent more time praising her than supporting him). The rest have been fundraisers to help pay off her campaign debt.

And, all this time, her surrogates and fundraisers have dragged their feet and Bill Clinton has done all he can to show that he could care less about whether Obama wins or loses. That's right . . . doing just enough to avoid criticism, but nowhere near enough to seriously expect to help elect Obama.

Sorry, but I'm almost positive that, if the roles had been reversed, Obama would have been forced out of the race in FEBRUARY; there would be no role call; and the Clintons wouldn't give a damn about Obama's "historic campaign" or how his supporters "want to be heard."

Nope, the Clintons would have probably treated Obama the same way Obama should have treated the Clintons all of this time. . . as nothing more than the distraction that they are. . . as nothing more than the threat that such distraction entails.

Yes, an Obama in Hillary's position would have been painted as a threat if the roles were reversed. . .

A threat to the election; a threat to health care, the economy, foreign policy, a woman's right to choose . . . a threat to everything at stake in this election.

So this is not about "Hillary's supporters." This is about Clinton ego . . .

This is about an ego that felt entitled to a prolonged race despite being rendered mathematically insignificant months ago. . .

This is about a Clinton ego that couldn't congratulate Obama on the night he clinched the nomination and wouldn't cede the race until her own supporters twisted her arm to make her do it . . .

This is about a Clinton ego that demanded Obama help repay a debt Hillary raised trying to smear him (attacks that are now being used by John McCain). . .

This is about a Clinton ego that endorsed John McCain and a campaign that injected race at every possible turn (i.e., "the black candidate can't win x voters" or "x voters are less likely to vote for a black candidate")(check the wiki) . . .

This is about a Clinton ego that has done everything in its power to undermine the Democratic nominee (and Party) in a crucial election year. . .

This is about a Clinton ego . . .

wait . . .

that's the problem. . .

This is STILL ABOUT THE CLINTONS.

So instead of praising an inspirational acceptance speech by Obama, the media will be more than happy to spend all of its time obsessing over how many votes Hillary Clinton got and just how that WEAKENS Obama heading into the Fall campaign.

The Clintons aren't stupid. They know this is what could happen.

Hillary doesn't have to beat Obama or pull off a coup at the convention. No, she just needs to weaken him; place that asterisk next to his name and give her supporters more reason to harp on what could have been. . . all with the hope of seeing Obama lose a narrow race in November. That way, Hillary gets to say "I told you so" while escaping blame for the loss.

This is not about Clinton's "supporters" (as if 18 million pro-Clinton votes were somehow anti-Obama). This is about Hillary Clinton. And so far, this convention is shaping up as though it will be all about . . . Hillary Clinton.

Sorry, but there will be no unity so long as 18 million people are patronizingly seen as "Hillary's supporters" and not "Democratic voters." There comes a time when this has to stop being about her crushed ego and start being about Obama's election as our next President of the United States.

Still, I'll trust that Obama knows what he's doing, here. After all, he's already gotten this far.

And I'm still as enthusiastic about his campaign as ever. But it's because of that strong support that some of us get a little tired of seeing Obama bend over backwards to make Hillary feel comfortable when she rarely (if ever) returns the favor. I want a winner, NOT a political martyr. I plan to see Senator Obama take his Oath of Office in January 2009.

Since they have no more excuses, I'll hope that this is the last time Obama has to deal with a Clinton distraction. And I hope that Obama realizes the sense of urgency that this needs to be the LAST time.

In the meantime, you'll have to pardon me for asking this question:

Senator Obama. . . just who's convention is this anyways?

Read more »