March 2008 Archives

You know the race is tight when campaigns stoop to the level of trotting out the lowest common denominator.  In this case it is Geraldine Ferraro.   Her comments have sparked a firestorm in the media and calls for Clinton to denounce her statements.  I can't agree more.  Ferraro's comments were nothing short of racist propaganda.

A CNN article quotes Ferraro saying "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position... He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Her statements reduce Illinois Senator Barack Obama to just some black man who happened to wander into a presidential election and "the country is caught up in the concept."  Her viewpoint is completely and utterly disrespectful of the position he holds as a United States Senator.

My short answer is "No".  And here is why:

There are several reasons for picking a particular running mate.  Some of those are:

1.  The running mate should share the same ideology.
2.  The running mate should complement the voting numbers by being able to carry states where the person on the top of the ticket couldn't or is weak.
3.  The running mate should be someone who the public would feel comfortable with stepping into the top spot if something happened to the President.

While on the surface, many would say that an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket would fit those criteria perfectly, there are several reasons why I believe there will not be a combined ticket.

A recent proposed bill in the Tennessee State House of Representatives would make it mandatory for a paternity test to be administered to newborns before birth certificate is issued.  The bill is sponsored by Rep. G.A. Hardaway (D-Memphis) - I'll let you make your own inference on Memphis' state of affairs, judging from the type of leglistation coming from their rep.

  On the other hand, Rep. Sherry Jones (D-Nashville), opposes the leglistation because she feels it is offensive to women.  Under this leglistation, even married couples, would have to go through a paternity test.

What sad state of affairs must we be in socially and morally when mothers don't know the father of their baby?  We're turning our state hospitals in a mass version of the Maury Povich Show.  What happened to one man and one woman, married and raising children together?  Is this a mere pipe dream nowadays?

Only when people start acting like responsible adults will be able to have a worthwile society.  Responsilbity comes in the home where a man and woman raise the child together, where people aren't sleeping around to the point of not knowing exactly who fathered their child.

And another question...can we give Memphis to Arkansas?  Most of the rest of Tennessee doesn't want it anymore. 

As of right now we have 3 choices for our next president.  I'm having trouble coming to terms with my choices.

First the one who shouldn't be given presidental duties.  Hillary.  You'll notice that in her campaign posters and media spots, she rarely refers to herself as Hillary Clinton.  "Clinton" evolks negative thoughts in many Americans, mostly because of Bill's numerous affairs.  Hillary is seen as honorable woman among Democratic women.  And yet, she has proven herself to be nothing new, more arrogant than ever.  She lent her own campaign $5 million of her own money.  And she tries to make herself out to be a friend of the working class.  Someone with $5 million of money laying around cannot be in touch with the average American.

We as Americans need something else besides having 2 families (Bush or Clinton) in the White House since 1988.  In my own mind no matter how many fancy dresses are in her closet, no matter what new hairstyle she's sporting, she'll always be white trash.

 

Then there's McCain, who I don't know much about except that he was POW for a while in Vietnam.  Yet the man himself seems too old to be president.  Plus he's done some questionable stuff.

I'm not at all impressed with McCain.  As far as I'm concerned, he has done nothing that would warrant presidency.  If anything he has said stuff that scares me.

Such as:

"I don't think Americans are concerned if we are in Iraq for a hundred years, a thousand years, or ten-thousand years." -John McCain.

"There's gonna be other wars.  I'm sorry to tell you there will be other wars." --John McCain

Now as a Christian, I am told that I must vote along social lines, such as opposing abortion, and other social ills that Republicains have a tency to champion.  Some people who I associate with would say it is my Christian duty.  And yet I'm tired of the same old song and dance which Bush has done for the past 7 years.  We need something better.  And sometimes it is important to have a change in power so that everyone is in check.

 

Enter Obama.  He is uniting in thought.  Gives excellent speeches.  Possesses a world view.  He would help America become great again in the eyes of the rest of the world.  And somehow I don't care that I disagree with him on some social issues.  I want change.  I want us out of Iraq.  I want America strong again.  Obama is our best hope to make this happen.  

 

      

Okay.  I'll lay it on the line here.  I've been saying it and thinking it for the last month or so and now I'm going to put it in my blog for future proof:  Barack Obama will beat Hillary Clinton to become the Democratic nominee.  Furthermore, Obama will beat John McCain in the general election to become the first black President of the United States.

In the last few weeks, Hillary's campaign has turned from blunt attacks from various "celebrities" to the kind of name-calling, kicking and scratching campaigns usually waged in small home-town elections.  In the last day or so, I noticed an interesting shift from Hillary when she gave the interview to the press aboard her campaign plane.  They say she sipped on a beer out of a plastic cup (insert your own Arkansas jokes here) and talked about uniting the party.  One reporter noted that she was unusually calm.  After reading about it, I wonder if she has seen the writing on the wall.  She obviously has seen the numbers and knows that, barring a miracle, she cannot take enough delegates to surpass Barak in pledged delegates.  And the super delegates will never give her the nomination and reverse the outcome of the votes of the people.  They would call her a Republican!!

With all that's going on, I don't expect Hillary to stick it out until the convention.  I think that if she doesn't win big in Pennsylvania, Hillary will admit defeat and call for the uniting of the Democratic party against the "Republican machine".

 

Mark

I decided to replace the system-generated first entry with one of my own.

Yes, I have upgraded to Movable Type 4 (from MT 2.3).  At this time, all of my old entries are stored safely away.  I will be bringing them into the new format/software as time allows.  But, I wanted to get up and running with the new version for several reasons:

 

1. My host changed their platform and I could no longer log into the old site.  That made it very difficult to post new entries. :)
2. With so many stupid/crazy/wierd things happening on the campaign trail, I just had to have a place to complain and point out how dumb other people are.

 

So, here it is.  The re-designed Braindrips.  I will likely work on tweaking the layout and style going forward, but this canned layout will do for now.

 

As before, sit back and enjoy my wit and powers of observation.

 

Mark