Archive for August, 2008
I KNOW WHO KOFI IS!!!!
The great mystery of Urbanagora is the identity of the man, or woman, who lives behind the mask that is Kofi. Much like Batman, he lives in the shadows and dark underplaces of Urbanagora coming out only to strive against liberal hackery and small minded thought, especially when such banalities are espoused by Brian, who, lets face it, is a bit of a Joker.
So imagine my surprise, and great honor, when I was contacted by the great and powerful Kofi himself. And I was further stunned when I was offered a view behind the mask. I now know who Kofi is, and I share that info with all of you. It is no other than that other big summer blockbuster.
“My name is Barack Obama. And I am Kofi, the commentator on that great American blog, Urbanagora.
“As you know, Illinois is my home state and I make it my business to follow closely the political discourse that happens there. Let me be honest; since I made that speech in 2004, I haven’t really had to do anything. I have pretty much been coasting on that.
“So in 2006, I began reading the blog and eventually started to contribute.
“Now, most of you will be surprised, given the seeming disparity between ‘Kofi’s’ views and my public platform. I gotta tell you, Kofi is the real guy, my platform is the act. Like anyone could actually believe that all you need is hope. I mean come on. I didn’t get here by hoping, I got where I am by kicking some ass, not by wishing myself to a good place. I am just surprised that people haven’t noticed that I have been ripping off my platform from JFK and the Beatles White Album. Revolution? Give Peace A Chance? My tax policy is based on ‘Don’t Pass Me By.’ (Although honestly, I am a little nervous about that, cause Ringo wrote that one, and, well, you know).
“So the Kofi identity has been great, as it acts like a pressure valve to all this crap I have to keep shoveling day in and day out. I mean, really, this is just ridiculous. And you all keep buying it wholesale.
“But the real reason I am speaking out is because of one of the commentators. Brian. Seriously. You need to calm down. It will be people like you that could screw this up for me. I mean, HIV? Really? There is a reason that I am losing votes daily. Its because of people like you. I haven’t changed my goddamn message since day one. You bastards are the ones annoying everyone away.
“I haven’t won crap yet, so quit acting like I have. And above all else don’t make allusions to death, disease and destruction because someone else disagrees with you. The liberals and conservatives both agree that is some truly petty shit, and makes all of us look bad.
“So, noun verb hope. Noun verb change. Yes we can, yes we can. Don’t screw this up for me.”
UPDATE: Senator Obama sent me this link of a column by U of I grad George Will. The senator thought it was especially good at pointing out some of the weaknesses of his platform.
Bill Clinton’s Speech
“He will not allow the world’s problems to obscure its opportunities.”
This is probably not the most politically effective line in Bill Clinton’s speech (which is pretty great so far), but it is among the most substantively important. We can expand on that in discussion in the comments later, but just throwing it out there for now.
UPDATE: Okay, not just “pretty great.” Fucking amazing. You know, after both Michelle Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s speeches, Keith Olbermann came on the air afterwards and basically foamed at the mouth with how much he loved their speeches. I thought those were both pretty good speeches, but on both occasions I felt like Keith was going overboard. Now I know what he felt like. I have no intelligent commentary at all, and fully welcome mockery from commenters, but ZOMFG THAT WAS SO GREAT!!!!!!
LATER UPDATE: Yglesias comments:
May I just observe that while Barack Obama relies on having well-written speeches to make his oratorical performances impressive, Bill Clinton is just relying on pure skills of awesomeness to make texts that are pretty disjointed on the page seem incredibly compelling.
STILL ANOTHER UPDATE: Attackerman says it best:
Shorter WJC: Dear GOP, fuck you. With an HIV carrier. Love, Bill.
Bill Clinton’s Speech
“He will not allow the world’s problems to obscure its opportunities.”
This is probably not the most politically effective line in Bill Clinton’s speech (which is pretty great so far), but it is among the most substantively important. We can expand on that in discussion in the comments later, but just throwing it out there for now.
UPDATE: Okay, not just “pretty great.” Fucking amazing. You know, after both Michelle Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s speeches, Keith Olbermann came on the air afterwards and basically foamed at the mouth with how much he loved their speeches. I thought those were both pretty good speeches, but on both occasions I felt like Keith was going overboard. Now I know what he felt like. I have no intelligent commentary at all, and fully welcome mockery from commenters, but ZOMFG THAT WAS SO GREAT!!!!!!
LATER UPDATE: Yglesias comments:
May I just observe that while Barack Obama relies on having well-written speeches to make his oratorical performances impressive, Bill Clinton is just relying on pure skills of awesomeness to make texts that are pretty disjointed on the page seem incredibly compelling.
STILL ANOTHER UPDATE: Attackerman says it best:
Shorter WJC: Dear GOP, fuck you. With an HIV carrier. Love, Bill.
History
That whole roll-call vote process was like some new form of torture, especially when that New Mexico guy went on the longest rant ever RIGHT BEFORE things were about to get good. But hey, look, Barack Obama just got nominated as the Democratic candidate for President of the United States. I know a lot of you guys aren’t huge fans, but still: that’s a hell of a moment, and one not many would have predicted even a few years ago, let alone, say, when my parents were kids.
UPDATE: I just saw Rep. John Lewis interviewed on CNN about this. I won’t try to paraphrase what he said, but wow. What it must be like to see everything he’s seen.
Thinking Things Are Okay
From Hillary Clinton’s speech last night (which I thought was quite good):
In 2008, [McCain] still thinks it’s okay when women don’t earn equal pay for equal work.
Ramesh Ponnuru responds:
Right: Opposing the Lily Ledbetter Act means approving of unequal pay for women. What a disgusting comment.
To which Matthew Yglesias responds:
And of course it’s true. It’s perfectly possible to think that it’s wrong to discriminate against women in your pay practices but just also oppose any effort to make it feasible to redress that right…But at some point politics is about policy. If your opposition to pay discrimination doesn’t extend to favoring measures to halt pay discrimination, then what’s it worth? To people suffering from illegal discrimination, it’s worth nothing. To people who want to engage in illegal discrimination, it’s worth quite a lot.
Which is true, but it’s conceding too much. Sure, McCain probably isn’t some kind of stone-age sexist who thinks women deserve less pay for equal work. But it’s verifiably true that he does think it’s okay for women to receive less pay for equal work. Right now, women do not get equal pay for equal work. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would be a dramatic step in correcting that problem. John McCain opposed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. He is, therefore, apparently just fine with women getting less pay for equal work. If he found that condition unacceptable, he would have voted for the piece of legislation necessary to do something about it. But he didn’t.
And maybe that’s defensible. Maybe women receiving less pay for equal work is preferable to passing federal legislation that would solve that problem. But that necessarily entails believing that women getting less pay for equal work is an acceptable consequence of not passing the legislation. Thus, in 2008, John McCain still thinks it’s okay when women don’t earn equal pay for equal work. Some readers, I’m sure, agree with him. I, for one, think it’s – what’s a good word? – disgusting.
Is American Leadership Enough?
John McCain in a speech today criticizing Obama’s internationalist approach to foreign policy:
My opponent had the chance to express such confidence in America, when he delivered a much anticipated address in Berlin. He was the picture of confidence, in some ways. But confidence in oneself and confidence in one’s country are not the same. And in that speech, Senator Obama left an important point unclear. He suggested that the end of the Cold War proved that there was, quote, “no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.”Now I missed a few years of the Cold War, as the guest of one of our adversaries, but as I recall the world was deeply divided during the Cold War — between the side of freedom and the side of tyranny. The Cold War ended not because the world stood “as one,” but because the great democracies came together, bound together by sustained and decisive American leadership.
All of this is more than an academic debate. For the sake of our own security, and the defense of our values in the affairs of the world, American leadership is critical.
His seven thousandth invocation of his time as a POW is annoying and cheap, but on the whole, this is actually a fairly honest articulation of the distinction between Obama and McCain’s foreign policy approaches. McCain is, of course, being purposefully ignorant in implying that Barack Obama is not aware that the Cold War was characterized by a sharp ideological division between capitalist and communist states. But he’s not wrong to draw a distinction between Obama’s emphasis on global cooperation and his own emphasis on American leadership.
Implicit in McCain’s criticism of Obama’s statement that there is “no challenge too great for a world that stands as one” is that McCain would have much preferred a statement that there is no challenge too great for America, or, perhaps, “the great democracies,” whichever ones those happen to be. Anybody comparing the success of the current Iraq War, which was carried out by a tiny coalition of the willing, to the success of, say, the Persian Gulf War, which was carried out under the auspices of the UN Security Council, might see cause to doubt McCain’s faith in America’s ability to act successfully without broad international support. Others might not be quite so eager to jump into another Cold War or even World War, even if they are confident in America’s prospects for eventual success.
But look. Argumentativeness aside, and this is (or at least should be) a pretty banal point, but this is how political debate should be conducted. McCain is presenting his view of how he thinks international affairs works. I find it foolish, and I find Obama’s view to be more seriously minded, morally centered, and based in reality. But ultimately, it’s an important, substantive division that deserves attention and debate. And yet, when I turn on cable news, I see a bunch of lazy media hype and Democratic hand-wringing over whether Obama is “HITTING BACK HARD ENOUGH” against attacks everybody seems to agree are beneath the intelligence of a third-grader but which they still can’t stop talking about. That’s depressing.
A McCain Le Gusta La Gasolina
So yesterday marked a hilarious (for me at least) point in the campaign. Amid the Obama lovefest and Hillary-supporters-are-pissed news, a somewhat obscure, but ultimately awesome political news event occurred. John McCain garnered the endorsement of Puerto Rican reggaeton star Daddy Yankee. This is huge. Ok, seriously, the man is a music god on the island and I can only assume that McCain will, by virtue of the endorsement, get a lot of attention. The only problem is that well Puerto Ricans can’t vote for president. In fact, no one living in Puerto Rico except military personnel can vote for any national office. Actually, I don’t even think Daddy Yankee can vote for John McCain.
Now I understand where the endorsement comes from. McCain has been a fierce advocate of immigration reform that isn’t mouth-foaming or unworkable. I don’t love it, but I can see where people would respect it. In fact, that was the primary reason for the endorsement. While I read a few articles about it, I couldn’t help but wonder if anyone told him what the guy’s songs are actually about. From casual sex in “Lo que paso paso” to thinly veiled references to muscle cars and sex in “Gasolina,” I think it’s a rather odd fit. McCain is (other than that little divorce remairrage soon after thing) a pretty straight-laced guy partnered with a guy advocating some rather un-family values.
When I think about the contrast combined with the fact that the endorser probably can’t even vote (no, I couldn’t find his official address, so I’m not 100% sure), it seems about a good as an endorsement from Gary Glitter. :-D. Hey, maybe “Gasolina” is about energy independence…Anyway, McCain apparently likes Daddy Yankee’s gasolina…just don’t tell him what that means (chances are McCain’s staff has no idea either).
Elections Don’t Really Hinge on This Stuff, Do They?
It appears that Michelle Obama has successfully persuaded white people that she’s a normal human being. Phew. War with Iran averted.
Elections Don’t Really Hinge on This Stuff, Do They?
It appears that Michelle Obama has successfully persuaded white people that she’s a normal human being. Phew. War with Iran averted.
The Media Is Dumb
I’ve been watching MSNBC for a little bit today and they’ve been talking quite a bit about the segment of the population still upset about Hillary not getting the nomination. The humorous/infuriating thing about this coverage is that it would take two hands to count the number of times one of the correspondents or pundits has explicitly conceded that this issue is getting too much coverage but that they basically just think it’s fun to talk about. Chris Matthews was on with a crowd of Hillary-supporters behind him, split between those who are now supporting Obama and those who are still holding out for Hillary. This may not be a particularly important fight, Matthews conceded, but “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Journalism at its finest, America. And this is the pro-Obama network. Sigh.
UPDATE: In the wise words of Chuck Todd, “I think in a few days we’re gonna look back at this and realize these people were the equivalent of the Ron Paul groupies who are gonna be at the Republican Convention.”