McClellan's Talking

It's really quite funny when you think about it. Whenever this disgusting administration goes "on message", one can hear a pattern emerging. Such was the case with the reaction to the new book by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan:
.
"It's puzzling".
.
"This just doesn't sound like Scott".
.
"This is sooo heartbreaking".
.
"He sounds like a left wing blogger".
.
"This is not the Scott I knew".
.
"Oh, Scotty, we hardly knew ye (Ha-roo! Ha-roo!)"
.
My pesonal favorite were the comments of the current press secretary Dana Perino, who described McClellan as a "disgruntled former employee". This is the same woman who back in December, when asked a question which contained a reference to the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't know what the questioner was referring to. Think about that for a minute. In October of 1962 the United States and the Soviet Union came to the very brink of nuclear war. For the first and only time, humanity was facing the very real possibility of the end of the world. It was the most infamous (and potentially lethal) diplomatic/military event in world history - and the press secretary to the president of the United States of America has never even heard about it! The Bush administration has been - from day one - packed to the rafters with idiots like Dana Perino. The question is literally begging to be asked: Just where in the hell do they find these assholes?
.
This book reveals absolutely nothing that anyone paying attention all these years didn't already know: the invasion of Iraq was based on non-existent or faulty intelligence and the American people were lied to in the run-up to the war. What is amazing is to hear a former high official of this administration admit as much. As it was quoted from the book in yesterday's New York Daily News:

`

"History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided - that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder....Waging an unnecessary was is a grave mistake....I've come to believe that an even more fundamental mistake was made....a decision to turn away from candor and honesty when those qualities were most needed. Our lack of candor and honesty in making the case for war would later provoke a partisan response from our opponents, that, in a way, further distorted and obscured a more nuanced reality."

This will only be the first book of many. It is interesting to contemplate just whom among the scores of sycophants who are now condemning McClellan will be writing their own kiss and tell memoirs a year or two down the line. You can be absolutely certain that a whole hell of a lot of them will eventually cash in while simultaneously trying to whitewash their respective roles as players in the most corrupt and incompetent administration in the history of human stupidity. And let us not forget the fact that a lot of these people are going to be prosecuted for serious felonies committed against the American people. What better way to handle all those nasty legal bills than a sweet, six-figure book deal? I can't wait for Karl Rove's book. That should be really interesting! The question is, what publishing firm will be disreputable enough to sell it? How many people will be foolish enough to buy it? The survival of too many depend on how much distance they will able to put between themselves and George W. Bush in the next year or so. Here is Scott McClellan's take on the First Fool:

"[He is] not quite the leader I once imagined him to be....He has engaged in a degree of self-deception that may be psychologically necessary to justify the tactics needed to win the political game....He has always been an instinctive leader more than an intellectual leader....he chooses based on his gut and his most deeply held convictions. Such was the case with Iraq....Bush's discomfort with change makes it difficult for him to step back from the bonds he develops and make clear-eyed decisions about what is best."
`

Actually, McClellan is quite charitable in his characterization of Bush. One of the assertions he makes in the book is that the Bush Mob distorted intelligence regarding Saddam Hussein's mythical WMD program in order to achieve their goal of bringing democracy to the Middle East. Bullshit. These people stole two elections in their own country. They don't give a damn about democracy in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. Their real motivation for invading was to seize what is generally believed to be the second or third largest oil reserves on the planet. For that reason, over a million men, women and little children are dead. What you have here is the very definition of war crimes. Sixty years ago former Nazis were being hanged at the gallows for a lot less.

Back on November 26, after McClellan announced the details of his forthcoming book, I wrote on this blog in a piece called, Sing, Scotty, Sing!!!:

"[W]henever anyone had the nerve to stand up and expose the corruption and incompetence of the Bush Mob (Paul O'Neil, Richard Clarke, Joe Wilson, Scott Ritter, John Kerry....the list is endless) that person's reputation was seriously damaged by the Karl Rove propaganda machine....My biggest fear is that Scotty is going to cave in to the pressure that Bush's henchmen will undoubtedly place on him."

When the April publication date came and went, I thought that they might have been successful at intimidating him. Thank goodness I was wrong about that - but I did get this right: the assault on McClellan's reputation is going full tilt. From the piece I wrote in November:

"Rush Limbaugh dismissed the story by implying that all one had to do was look at Scott's record of distortions as spokesman for the Bush White House to see that he's a known liar. Why believe him now? I wonder, did Rush even bother thinking that one through before blurting it out? It's the drugs. It must be."

Oh, and speaking of drugs! My favorite quote from the book is about the 2000 campaign and Bush's rumored cocaine use:

"I heard Bush say, 'You know, the truth is I honestly don't remember whether I tried it or not. We had some pretty wild parties back in the day, and I just don't remember.' I remember thinking to myself, How can that be? How can someone simply not remember whether or not they used an illegal substance like cocaine?....I felt I was witnessing Bush convincing himself to believe something that probably was not true."

Hopefully the American people will start to see the pattern here and recognize the assault on McClellan's character for what it is: lies that are only meant to distract us from a much larger and ominous truth. The fact is they were lying to us when they said we were in imminent danger of "mushroom clouds". They ignored critical, tangible intelligence that Saddam Hussein and his two nutty sons were a threat to no one but themselves. The result is without a doubt the most spectacular and catastrophic foreign policy blunder in American history - possibly in the history of the world. This war is lost. Our only option for "winning" it would be to drop several nuclear weapons on the country, killing every human being inhabiting it. Since that is not an option (at least I hope like hell it's not) our only choice would be to withdraw as soon as possible and hope for the best. If our only exit strategy depends on total victory, we'll be bogged down in Iraq forever.

Every day in every way it's getting worse and worse for this nightmare of an administration. As the months drag by, and the specter of the damage that these people have done to our country becomes more and more apparent, the inevitable reality will start to sink in that many people need to be prosecuted and sent to prison for the rest of their lives. That list would include George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney. It is not merely the crimes that have been committed against the people of Iraq - bad as those crimes are - but the scores of billions of dollars that have gone unaccounted for in the process. Seriously, whom do you think has the clout to steal that much cash - Scott McClellan?

It's going to be interesting to watch this administration go into damage control in the next few weeks. Trying to portray squeaky clean Scotty as some kind of anti-American, bomb-throwing anarchist is going to be a bit of a chore to say the least. Said Press Secretary Perino, Bush "doesn't recognize this as the Scott McClellan that he hired and confided in and worked with for so many years." Of course he doesn't. This Scott McClellan doesn't even vaguely resemble Bush's sycophantic spokesman of two years ago. There's been a change here and it's a welcome one. Good for you, Scott!

Tom Degan

Goshen, NY

tomdegan@frontiernet.net

SUGGESTED READING:

What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception by Scott McClellan

The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Frank Rich

V.P. Clinton? Forget About It!

It is amazing. A day doesn't go by where I am not knocked almost senseless by the utter shamelessness of Hillary Clinton. Her campaign appearances are a virtual cornucopia of insincerity. Did you ever notice this? Every time she takes the stage, within ten seconds she'll flash a big shit-eating grin to a "friend" in the audience, she'll then point to that person and vigorously nod - it happens every single time! If you think I am exaggerating, watch her the next time she mounts the stage at a rally. To whom do you think she is pointing? Here's the answer: no one. It makes for a good photo opportunity. One of the most iconic photographs ever taken of President Kennedy was at a press conference in 1961. Jack is in the midst of a good laugh and is acknowledging the next reporter's question by pointing at him. The Democrats (and more than a few Republicans) have always loved that photo and many of them have tried to emulate it. Hillary is just doing her tried and true, John Fitzgerald Wannabe impersonation
`

It is now clear to anyone who has been bothering to pay attention that the Junior Senator from the state of New York is quite content to hold the Democratic Party hostage for as long as it suits her merry whim. She knows damned good and well that she is not going to be chosen as the standard bearer for the Democratic party at the convention in Denver this August. The only chance she will ever have at wining the nomination will be by running as second on the ticket this year, subtly sabotaging the campaign from within and trying again in 2012. Does that sound like a slightly paranoid scenario? Maybe it is - but I have earned the right not to trust Senator Hillary Clinton. You've earned it too.
.
Be forewarned: our gal has every intention of hijacking the party of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt by forcing it to put her on the ticket as Senator Obama's running mate. How bad of an idea is this? Let me count the ways....Here are seven good reasons why she should not be on the ballot in 2008:
**********
Reason #1:
It's all a matter of balance. Let's face some serious facts here, kiddies. The Dems have taken a decided roll of the dice by giving the nod to a relatively obscure, forty-six year old black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. To say that this ticket is going to have to be carefully and perfectly balanced is the understatement of the century. Two major precedents on one ticket is much more than this silly country can handle. Like it or not, if Barack is going to be successful in November, his VP nominee will have to be a southern, white male - he doesn't even have to be a conservative! The American people have had damned near thirty years of the putrid Reagan/Gingrich/Bush/Bush Revolution and are finally awakening to the fact that it will take generations to undo the damage that has been done to this once-great nation by these clowns. Trust me on this one: they are now more than willing to go in a new direction. In fact, they are desperate to do so.
.
Reason #2:
We've already had eight years of Dick Cheney. Do you seriously believe that, were the Democrats somehow able to win with her on the ticket, she would ever consent to the traditional roll of the vice-president as defined in the U.S. Constitution? In other words, do you think for a minute that Hillary Clinton would spend eight or even four years presiding over the senate, waiting to break a tie? That is the only role the vice-president is legally required to play. All else is extra-constitutional. It's easy to imagine Vice-President Clinton mounting a counter presidency within the administration, causing nothing but grief and embarrassment to President Obama.
.
Reason #3:
America is sick to death of the Clintons. Having Senator Clinton on the ticket is not a necessity - in fact it is nothing more than an unnecessary risk. I was a Democrat at one time - and not just a passive Democrat, either: I was a member of the Orange County (New York) Democratic Committee. I left that party a decade ago for many reasons. William Jefferson and Hillary Clinton are just two of those reasons. Between the two of them they were able to set progressive politics in this country back half a century. Two for the price of one, huh? Thanks but no thanks.
.
Reason #4:
It's all about Hillary. In October of 2003 Senator Clinton stupidly voted to give this president (of all presidents) the authority to wage war on the sovereign nation of Iraq without the constitutionally mandated congressional approval. That vote should have been the biggest no-brainer of her career and she blew it! That she had her eye on the 2008 election and she was trying to prove that she was as blood thirsty as any man, there can be no denying. Would voting against that measure have been seen as an act of political courage? Sure it would have, given the hysterical nature of the time. But that's what you expect from a potential president: courage, not expediency. For that reason alone, she doesn't deserve to have her name on a laundry ticket.
.
Reason #5:
Have you noticed how unbearably condescending Hillary is with her supporters? Barack Obama, on the other hand, speaks up to his audience, appealing to their imagination and intellect. Walking away from an Obama rally, one feels inspired. After three minutes of Hillary Clinton, I just want to take a shower. Barack has refused - time and again - to pander to the lowest common denominator. Hillary has demonstrated too many times to count that there's no depth to which she won't sink. ("SHAME ON YOU, BARACK OBAMA") Shame on you, Hillary.
.
Reason #6:
The Far Right at the moment is as dejected as they've been at any point since 1964. Their motivation is dead. How to motivate them? Three words: Hillary Rodham Clinton. They can't kick poor old Teddy Kennedy around anymore (God bless him). Hillary is the bell that will make these knuckleheads drool like a pack of half-witted Pavlovian dogs. My advice? Keep her off the ticket.
.
Reason #7:
Honestly, would you be able to stomach four more years of those stupid pants suits? I ask you.

**********
The Clintonistas are now implying that their gal has been a victim of sexism throughout this whole nasty process. Oh, please! The reason I am not supporting Hillary Clinton is not because she is a woman, it is because she is Hillary Clinton. If her name had been Eleanor Holmes Norton, I would be working overtime to secure her the nomination - Barack Obama be damned.
.
So there you have it. Vice-President Clinton? Bad idea. Don't even go there, okay? Every election since 1980 has had a Bush or a Clinton - or both - on the ticket. Let's put a stop to this stupid dynastic trend in our national elections. That isn't what this country is all about. Not even close.
.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
.
BREAKING NEWS:
In a meeting this morning with the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Argus-Leader newspaper, Senator Clinton was asked why she didn't get out of the race. After explaining to them that her husband wasn't able to secure the nomination until the June 1992 California primary (which isn't true, by the way, he had wrapped it up weeks before) she then went on to make the following, incredible statement:
.
"We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California....uhh....you know I just, I don't understand it....I find it curious, and I don't want to attribute motivations and strategies to people that I don't really know. But it is - It's a historical curiosity to me....I don't understand it."
.
I understand it, Hillary. You need a long rest, dear. That's not a sexist statement; that's an undeniable fact. As Keith Olbermann asked this evening on MSNBC's Countdown, "Why, in the name of all that all of us hold dear, would she say anything like this?"
.
The Clinton campaign is over. So is any chance she had to be second on the ticket.
.
Never mind.

THEY'RE SOOOO DUMB!!!

"Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate."

John Fitzgerald Kennedy
January 20, 1961

If my name were Kevin James, let me tell you what I would do: First, I would pick up a shovel, find a remote location somewhere out in the middle of a forest, and I would dig a deep hole (although not quite as deep as the one he dug for himself last night on MSNBC's Hardball). I would then place myself in that whole, and I would stay there for as long as it took for me to age to the degree where I was no longer even recognizable to my own family. When I emerged from that hole after a period of a decade and a half or so, I would change my name - just for good measure, you understand.
.
The evening of May 15, 2008 was a night that will go down in history as one of the golden moments of Cable News Talk. When Chris Matthews dies (which I sincerely hope isn't for a very, very long time), the televised obituaries will carry the clip. Oh, I could view it all day and into the night and never get tired of it. The irony of it all is that last night was one of the few nights I didn't watch Hardball. I was dining with a friend at a Japanese restaurant in Monroe, NY called the Plum House. (By the way, if, perchance, you ever find yourself in this neck of the woods, I highly recommended the place). It was only when I woke up this morning that I managed to catch the interview in all its juicy entirety. What a delight! It was as good as it gets. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you, Mr. Matthews!

First a little background. Yesterday, in a speech delivered in Israel, the man who was installed as president of the United States by an ideologically perverted Supreme court almost eight years ago, made a clumsy and ignorant reference to the Democratic nominee (Get used to the idea, Hillary) Barack Obama and his stubborn insistence that a nation must negotiate with its ideological enemies. Accusing the Illinois senator of appeasement, our esteemed halfwit-in-chief made the following incredible (given the location) statement:

"As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American Senator [William Borah of Idaho] declared, 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

The First Fool refuses to understand the first rule of international diplomacy: You talk to your friends. You negotiate with your enemies. That is why this administration's foreign policy has been such a sick joke and an unprecedented catastrophe.

On last night's installment of Hardball, Chris Matthews highlighted two opposing opinions with regard to the "appeasement" argument: Mark Green, President of Air America Radio, and Kevin James, a shrill, right wing talk show host who broadcasts out of Los Angeles. At one point, this nitwit used the appeasement of Hitler by the British government in 1938 as a modern day analogy to negotiating with Hamas. During the interview, he seemed to be giving the impression that he didn't know the difference between negotiation and appeasement. He didn't. The guy didn't even have an eighth grade level knowledge of world history. Said Chris, "Tell me what Neville Chamberlain did." For four or five minutes - but what must have seemed like four or five hours to Kevin James - he stayed glued to the main message of the GOP's talking points and could only shout out the same, stupid message:

"CHAMBERLAIN WAS AN APPEASER!"

He had absolutely no idea of the details of the infamous Munich Conference of September 1938 that enabled Hitler to annex a huge portion of Czechoslovakia, nor the "peace in our time" debacle that resulted from it. It was obvious that he didn't even know who the hell Neville Chamberlain was. The "discussion" (if that's what you want to call it) ended this way:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: You don't know what you're talking about, Kevin. You don't know what you're taking about. Tell me what Chamberlain did wrong.

KEVIN JAMES: Neville Chamberlain was an appeaser, Chris! Neville Chamberlain was an appeaser, all right?

CM: I've been sitting here for five minutes asking you to say what the president was referring to in 1938 at Munich.

KJ: I don't know.

CM: You don't know, thank you.

Twenty-four times Matthews tried to get this screaming jackass to define Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler in Munich seventy years ago. Twenty-four times James just could not do it. It really was a beautiful thing to behold. A shell shocked and somewhat embarrassed Mark Green, watching this spectacle transpire before his disbelieving eyes, was finally able to blurt out, "Kevin, when you're in a hole, you stop digging." To think that this nitwit actually gets paid as a political commentator - and I write this stuff for nothing. Life is sort of funny that way, isn't it?

Ah! It was classic, right wing, unintentional comedy at its finest! One of the joys of any progressive with a warped sense of humor (that would include yours truly) is watching these assholes make utter fools of themselves. I mean, they're the gift that just keeps giving and giving! I remember a day back in 2000. I was driving through central Pennsylvania, listening to one of these reactionary twits bloviating from a station somewhere in Ohio. At the time, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley was working for the presidential campaign of Al Gore. All of the sudden - to even my surprise (these knuckleheads really have to work at it to surprise me) - the guy starts criticizing Daley for his actions during the Democratic convention riots of 1968. My main point of contention with this silly argument is the inconvenient little fact that the Mayor Daley of 1968 was by this time long dead - having died in 1978, over two decades before! The Mayor Daley of 2000 was his son Richard, Jr. Because the signal was faint, I literally had to pull over to the side of the highway to listen. On and on he went for five or six minutes. I waited and waited for one of his staff or his many sycophantic callers to correct him on this major faux pas. Of course, not one of them had the intelligence to even notice that he had committed one. It truly was a sublime moment in the annals of far-right idiocy - as good as it gets.

The very fact that fools such as this have overtaken the people's airwaves since Reagan deregulated the FCC a generation ago is symptomatic as to why Americans in general are the most gut-bustingly stupid people on the planet. That really wasn't the case forty and fifty years ago. Our parents and grandparents went to the polls with a fairly good idea of what the critical issues were that this country might have been facing at any particular point in time. That is no longer true. At this moment, one of the main subjects of America's national political dialogue is whether or not Senator Obama is an "elitist" because of the type of food he prefers to eat. That's what it has come to! That's how dumbed down this country has become. Do you need any more evidence? Just take one good look at the inarticulate madman sitting in the Oval Office that a huge percentage (although not most) of American people naively sent to the White House - not once - but twice. Need I go on? I thought not. Please, If I sound to you a bit smug, forgive me but I've earned the right to be so. All true progressives have.

If you ever have a chance, check out the Kennedy/Nixon debates from September 1960. You can probably order a video of it to rent at your local library. The first thing one notices when viewing that historical event is the fact that both men, for the most part, are speaking as if they assume that the average citizen has an attention span of better than three seconds. Say what you want about Jack 'n' Dick, imperfect men thought they were (especially Nixon - Heavens to Betsy!), they both had a healthy respect for the intelligence of the American people. Now let us fast forward that tape to the autumn of 2000. When I videotaped the Gore/Bush debates, I labeled that particular cassette, "Dumb and Dumber: The Sequel". Seriously!

As the bumper sticker on my old pick up once declared, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." Thankfully, the public is finally starting to pay half-hearted attention to what is happening to their once-great nation. Sadly, it is not out of any sincere desire to learn and understand affairs of state, but only because events are starting to effect them personally - gas prices, the food crisis, the sinking economy, etc. But at least as the infrastructure of this country collapses all around us; as millions lose their jobs; as millions more are thrown into the kind of grinding, mass poverty America has not known since the gilded age of the Robber Barons over a century ago; as the middle class of this country slowly but surely ceases to even exist; as America confronts the coming socio-economic catastrophe brought on by three decades of corruption and incompetence....we will at least have the solace of knowing that the the loony right wing will be entertaining us into oblivion with gales of unintentional laughter for decades to come!

Thank goodness for these little blessings.

Tom Degan
from the Cornwall, NY Library
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
.
Here is a link to a video of the Matthews/James confrontation and meltdown. It literally has to be seen to be believed. Enjoy!

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/85620/

Hillary Huckabee

On Tuesday, May 6, at 5:02 AM, I posted a comment on the excellent political website AlterNet. Under the title, "She Can't Win", I wrote:

"The Clintonistas have forgotten a very important fact of political life: a Democratic candidate seeking the presidency cannot possibly win without a huge turnout of African Americans. Come election day [should they give her the nomination], many people will remember the vicious race baiting of Hillary and her cohorts and many of them will end up staying home - or voting for Ralph Nader."

A little later that morning, after having had a second look at what I had written, I decided that the term "vicious race baiting" was a tad strong (I shouldn't write anything before I've had that first cup of coffee, should I?) I posted an apology to Ms. Clinton and her supporters, said that I should have used the phrase "subtle race baiting" and left it at that. I'm beginning to have second thoughts. After listening to a recording of a phone interview she gave on Wednesday to USA Today, I'm starting to think that "vicious race baiting" was somewhat of an understatement:

"Senator Obama's support among working, hard working Americans - White Americans - is weakening again, and....Whites in both states [Indiana and North Carolina] who hadn't completed college were supporting me....I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on....There's a pattern emerging here."

Wow, I thought, that's fairly vicious, isn't it! I take it back. I am not trying to imply that Ms. Clinton is a racist; certainly that is not the case. But what she was trying to say in a non-too-subtle way was this: "Hey, America! This black guy can't possibly win. Send the forty-third White person to the White House!" By the way, when it gets to the point that your main selling point is that you're supported by the least educated among us, I think the time has come to seriously consider packing it in.

Truth be told, the bold and naked aggression of Hillary Clinton and company is something to behold. What is happening here is as obvious as it is tragic (not to mention despicable ): she is trying to sabotage Barack Obama's campaign in the general election, guaranteeing a McCain victory in November and leaving an opening for her to run in 2012. The fact that another four years of a GOP controlled White House will destroy this country (that's assuming that it is not already beyond saving) apparently does not mean a thing to her. Maybe it would be unfair to imply that Senator Clinton does not love this country, but it is crystal clear that she loves herself a whole lot hell of a lot more. How does this woman even sleep at night?

Hillary, it's over. You ran a historic campaign but it's over - done, kaput, finis. You are never going to be president of the United States of America - not in 2008; not in 2012. Maybe it'll happen in the next lifetime but not in this one. As 'historic' as your campaign might have been, it was terribly planned and unprofessionally run. The people you surrounded yourself with were not known for their ability or political smarts but by their loyalty to you. We're near the end of eight years of that kind of an administration and where has it gotten us? Intelligent leaders keep close to them men and women who will say the cold, hard and bitter truth - not an entourage of starry-eyed sycophants. And Marc Penn? Where in the hell did you find him? I've hardly ever seen a Republican that sleazy! Am I to believe that this guy was to have a role in your administration?? What, are you nuts??? The last thing this country needs at this point in time is a moderate version of the Bush White House. It's over, Hillary. Come to your senses and get a grip. In the words of Bob Dylan, "It's all over now, baby blue."

David Letterman put it perfectly. Although Hillary lost North Carolina and barely won Indiana, "She has a substantial lead in the state of Denial."

41: Bush; 42: Clinton; 43: Bush; 44: Clinton....

ENOUGH ALREADY!

We cannot allow America's future to be placed in the hands of two power-hungry, dysfunctional families. We are not a nation of dynasties. That's the kind of thing the Founders of this country warned us about over two-hundred years ago. We need a second Clinton administration just about as much as we needed this second Bush administration. What we need - desperately - is something new. That "newness" is personified in Barack Obama. We don't want to return to the foolish policies of the past. The first Clinton administration was quite capable in many ways. It certainly was head over heels better than what we have now. But there is also a bitter legacy from the Clinton era. They were all-to-willing to go along with the extremist forces within the Republican leadership in the House and Senate at a time they should have been fighting against them. No. The last thing this country needs is four or (Heaven forbid!) eight years of the style of indecision and appeasement that Hillary Clinton has demonstrated since becoming senator.

Here are just a few questions that are screaming to be addressed: Why has Senator Clinton been endorsed by the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Richard Mellon Scaife? Why is Rush Limbaugh encouraging his Republican listeners to vote for her in states where cross filing is allowed? Why is Pat Buchanan (whom I love by the way - politics be damned) advocating that she fight her way straight through to the convention in August? Why was her recent interview with Bill O'Riley a virtual love fest of softball questions? Have these knuckleheads finally seen the light? Not bloody likely. They know very well that the American people, for the most part, are sick to death of the Clintons. They know that a Clinton nomination means certain defeat for the Democratic party come November. Why is it that so many registered Democrats are completely blind to what anyone paying attention can see is an obvious Machiavellian political ploy?

If they know what's good for them, the Clinton camp will take a deep breath and face some undeniable facts. They've already hurt Barack Obama's chances by implying that John McCain would make a better president than he. You can take it to the bank that the GOP will use her "endorsement" in their campaign ads in the autumn. If Obama is defeated in November, a good argument will be made that the blame should be placed at her doorstep. If that happens, not only will she not be nominated as standard bearer in 2012, she won't even be nominated to run again for the senate in that same year (There are thousands of us here in New York who will see to that).

What the Clinton people have to realize is that what they have here is a lose/lose situation. They might as well see the light, recognize the hopelessness of their plight, do the right thing and give the senator from Illinois a hearty and sincere thumbs up. If they really think they can somehow seize this thing at the convention and walk away with a party united behind them, I have just two words for them: Chicago 1968. 'Nuff said?

True, the Democratic party is taking a decided risk by giving the nomination to an African American, even someone as charismatic as Senator Obama. But to hand the nomination to Hillary Clinton would have been sheer insanity. America is in dire need of many things at this point in its history. Another Clinton White House is not one of them; trust me on this one, campers.

For months I've been suggesting that the Dems come up with a compromise candidate, someone who hasn't been as damaged during the primaries as Clinton and Obama have been (My pick would have been John Edwards). Since that is not likely to happen at this stage, it is the responsibility of all smart progressives (we used to be called liberals) to get behind the campaign of Barack Obama. This is the most crucial presidential contest since 1932. Not in seventy-six years has the need for this country to go in a new direction been as blatantly apparent as it is at this moment in our history. Let's get behind this guy - NOW.

Tom Degan

Goshen, NY

tomdegan@frontiernet.net

NOTE: Here's a link to AlterNet. It really is a great site: http://www.alternet.org/

Tomorrow Never Knows

"Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream. This is not dying. This is not dying."
John Lennon

It has to be stated for the record: 2008 is turning out to be one hell of an interesting year. Some years are like that. Take 1968 for instance. Forty years later and I can remember that year like it was yesterday, young as I was (I would turn ten in August). Sure, it was an awful year - damned near as awful as they come - but it sure wasn't boring, was it? Or how about 1974? How could anybody forget the all-too-public meltdown of Richard Milhaus Nixon? Something as weird as that has a tendency of staying with you. 1945 was another monumental year. Although I was not around for it, 1945 saw the sudden death of an American president (FDR), the end of World War Two and the beginning of a longer, subtler and colder war.

.

And then there are those years that just refuse to make so much as a blip on the old memory screen. 1991? BORRRING! That may be said of any year during the reign of George Bush the elder. 1982? For the life of me, the only thing I can recall about that year (other than a really memorable road trip to Fort Lauderdale) was the fact that 1982 finally....mercifully....saw the cancellation of M*A*S*H, a program that in its final years had become so maudlin and preachy, it was virtually unwatchable. The final program, which captured one of the largest viewing audiences up to that time, wasn't any different. When the last jeep pulled out of a deserted Camp 4077, I remember thinking to myself, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Hawkeye".

.

2008 is turning out to be one of the major exceptions to the rule. Whatever the outcome, this is a year that historians will still be writing about a century from now. And to think that it isn't even half over. Incredible.

.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008, may very well turn out to be another remarkable day of what has proven to be a truly awful and remarkable year. When the polls close in the states of Indiana and North Carolina tomorrow night, we should (one hopes anyway) have a much clearer picture as to who the eventual nominee of the Democratic Party will be. For me, it is very personal. I want to see a Black family living in the White House; that's all there is to it. This is something I've dreamed about since I was fifteen years old - and not just any Black family. Al Sharpton's 2000 candidacy did not fill me with any noticeable degree of hope. Nor, for that matter, did Jesse Jackson's 1988 run for the White House. His incredible speech at the convention that summer notwithstanding, old Jesse never made much of an impression.

.

This is the moment that I've been waiting for, baby! I want Barack Obama to win this thing so badly I can almost taste it. My very first real encounter with America's nasty history with respect to race was as a freshman in High School. One day in 1973, while casually browsing through the school library, I came across a volume with the eye-opening title, "NIGGER". I might not normally have shown any interest in such a book, but upon casual examination, I was to learn that the author, Dick Gregory, was a comedian. That sealed the deal for me. Talk about fate! Had he been a sports star, a dramatic actor or an ex-congressman, I probably would not have given the book so much as a second glance. It is my opinion that throughout its history, America's most valuable citizens have not been its politicians, but its comedians. My own personal Mount Rushmore would have the faces of Mark Twain, Will Rogers, Groucho Marx and Lenny Bruce carved into the mountain's side for all time and eternity. Ten years after discovering Dick Gregory, in the Spring of 1983, I had the honor of meeting him on the corner of Fifth Avenue and Fifty-seventh Street in New York City. We had a very nice chat, as we leisurely made our way toward Tenth Avenue. It was a moment I'll never forget as long as I live. Reading his autobiography in the library of the old Goshen Central High School three and a half decades ago was the beginning of my long and varied political education.

.

Although my opinion of Barack Obama's candidacy has been somewhat lukewarm to date, it cannot be denied that when one looks at the man, the potential for growth is very real. There is no doubt that, should he win the election in November, he is not going to surround himself with a posse of half-witted, sycophantic and ideological "yes" men, unlike another president whom we all know and loathe. The very reality of an Obama presidency would send a symbolic message - not only to the rest of the world - but, more importantly, to ourselves; a message perfectly articulated by John F. Kennedy in his 1961 Inaugural Address, "Symbolizing an end as well as a beginning. Signifying renewal as well as change." It is next to impossible to believe that an Obama administration will merely be "more of the same". This is not your father's Democratic politician. This guy is different.

.

The idea of a non-white chief executive is an idea long overdue. No other group of people within the American Experiment have suffered more profoundly and unfairly than our brothers and sisters of color. As was said on this site in January, America has been ready for an African American president since March 5, 1770, when Crispus Attucks, a Black man, became the first human being to give his life for this country. True, Barack Obama is not really a "Heavy Metal Black guy" like Malcolm X; he is more of an "Easy Listening Black guy" in the manner of Al Roker. Still, you get the idea.

.

This can't be emphasized enough: a second Clinton White House? That's a joke, right? It has to be! I've gone down that road already and, to tell you the truth, I don't want to go back there. You shouldn't either. The fact that, even today, the last Clinton administration is still portrayed by the Right Wing as a hotbed of liberalism doesn't even come close to passing the giggle test. Bill Clinton as president and Hillary Clinton as senator are not and have never been true "Progressives" by any stretch of the imagination. All one has to do is look a their record to dispel any such notions. And let us not forget the sad and bitter fact that in October of 2002, she was presented with the most important decision of her life and she blew it. When she voted to allow the Bush administration the authority to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq without the Constitutionally mandated congressional approval, she revealed herself to be a person totally lacking in judgement. The best thing that can be said of a potential Hillary Clinton administration is that it won't be one half as bad as George W. Bush's. I think that we can do better - much better.

.

As was true seventy-five years ago, so it is true today: America will only be saved by a good, old-fashioned, meat and potatoes liberal. In the space of thirty years, the Conservatives have managed to destroy the infrastructure of a country that used to be a pretty nice place in which to live. What is now happening to your once-great nation is this: for the fourth time in their history, the American people are in the process of re-learning a lesson they should have learned almost a century and a half ago during the administration of Ulysses S Grant. The lesson is this:

.

CONSERVATIVE PHILOSOPHY OF GOVERNANCE DOES NOT WORK - PERIOD.

.

It never has. It never will. Three times in our history, the "plutocracy" (Today we refer to it as as "the right wing") was able to seize control of all three branches of the government. Three times in our history they drove this country into the economic ditch. Well how 'bout that. It's happened yet again. Go figure.

.

That Senator Obama is still a contender for the nomination after his quest for the White House was all-but-sabotaged - not only by the Clintonistas - but by his "friend" and former pastor Jeremiah Wright (Shut up, Reverend. Please shut up) is indicative of the sheer momentum of his campaign. Not Since Robert F. Kennedy forty years ago has a candidate inspired so much optimism and hope. Unlike John McCain and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama appeals, not to the darker inclinations of humankind, but to the better angels of their nature. He is what we have been waiting for.

.

Tom Degan

Goshen, NY

tomdegan@frontiernet.net

.

SUGGESTED READING:

No More Lies

by Dick Gregory

.

Photograph to left of column is of Dick Gregory circa 1964

.

AFTERTHOUGHT 5/7/08 (6:31 AM):

.

Last night Barack Obama won North Carolina decidedly while Hillary Clinton barely squeaked by in Indiana. Said Ms. Clinton, "And now thanks to you it's full speed on to the White House".

.

Medications, please.